FACULTY OF LAW DEANS OFFICE TIENSESTRAAT 41 3000 LEUVEN Academic year 2013 - 2014

Promoter: Prof. S. PARMENTIER

Co-promoter: dr. B. VAN WIJNENDAELE

Dissertation, presented by ELLEN VAN DAMME, for the

final examination of the degree of MASTER OF

CRIMINOLOGICAL SCIENCES

Mareros and pandilleros in Honduras: the reintegration of youth gang members

Abstract

The focus of this dissertation is on the reintegration of youth gang members in Honduras. The

aim of this qualitative research is to broaden the knowledge of reintegration processes and

programs in one specific country in Central America, namely, Honduras. A sample of fourteen

interviews with stakeholders in the field of maras and pandillas is being investigated and the

results revealed some similarities between the different methods of reintegration. Our data

suggest that a comprehensive process, including the family, school, community, and

governmental support via social politics is necessary to give the youngster a platform where he

can reintegrate himself into society, and refrain from committing any criminal behavior.

However, most respondents agreed upon the fact that leaving a gang is very difficult and

includes high risks, the most infringing being assassination. Most stakeholders call for more

investment in prevention at an early stage, i.e. before a youngster gets related to a gang.

I

Acknowledgements

This dissertation is made possible with the help of many people, which I would like to thank.

First of all I want to thank my promoter, Prof. dr. Stephan Parmentier and co-promoter, dr.

Barbara Van Wijnendaele, for their guidance and enthusiasm throughout this dissertation. I

would also like to express my gratitude towards the University Arbitration Committee on Risk

Destinations, which approved my research application. Furthermore, I would like to thank all

respondents I interviewed in Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, El Salvador and Guatemala. I am

very grateful for their cooperation and friendliness. A special thanks to IUDPAS in Tegucigalpa,

Honduras. The University institute facilitated me during most of my interviews in Honduras. I

want to thank Dir. Migdonia Ayestas for welcoming me at IUDPAS and Ronny Barahona for

facilitating the contacts with key figure respondents in Honduras. Finally, I would like to thank

the family Macedo Hernandez who hosted me during my time in Tegucigalpa. I am very grateful

for their hospitality and care.

II

Table of Contents

Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... 2

Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ I

List of abbreviations ................................................................................................................... IV

List of annexes ............................................................................................................................. VI

1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1

2. Literature review .................................................................................................................. 3

2.1 Maras and Pandillas in Central America ................................................................................. 3

2.1.1 The rise of maras and pandillas in Central America ......................................................... 4

2.1.2 The phenomenon of gangs in Central America.................................................................. 5

2.2 The situation in Honduras ....................................................................................................... 11

2.2.1 The political situation in Honduras ................................................................................. 12

2.2.2 The socio-economic situation in Honduras ..................................................................... 16

2.3 Criminological theories of gangs ............................................................................................ 17

2.3.1 Socio-ecological theories ................................................................................................. 17

2.3.2 Anomie theories ............................................................................................................... 18

2.3.3 Social process theories .................................................................................................... 20

2.3.4 Theories on risk factors ................................................................................................... 23

2.4 Rehabilitation – reintegration ................................................................................................. 25

2.4.1 Definitions ........................................................................................................................ 25

2.4.2 Criminological theories of rehabilitation/reintegration .................................................. 26

2.4.3 Rehabilitation/reintegration in Honduras ....................................................................... 32

2.4.4 Good and bad practices of rehabilitation/reintegration interventions ............................ 36

3. Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 38

3.1 Definition of the central problem ............................................................................................ 38

3.1.1 Research topic and objectives .......................................................................................... 38

3.1.2 Description of the research questions.............................................................................. 38

3.2 Conceptual framework ............................................................................................................ 39

3.3 Research design ...................................................................................................................... 41

III

3.3.1 Research method .............................................................................................................. 41

3.3.2 Sampling process ............................................................................................................. 42

3.3.3 Data collection ................................................................................................................. 43

3.3.4 Data analysis ................................................................................................................... 44

3.3.5 Quality of research .......................................................................................................... 45

4. Interview results ...................................................................................................................... 46

4.1 Gang involvement ................................................................................................................... 47

4.2 Leaving the gang ..................................................................................................................... 51

4.2.1 (Personal) reasons to leave the gang............................................................................... 51

4.2.2 Ways of leaving the gang ................................................................................................. 54

4.2.3 Difficulties of leaving the gang ........................................................................................ 57

4.3 Reintegration into society ....................................................................................................... 60

4.3.1 Community based ............................................................................................................. 60

4.3.3 Psychological treatment ................................................................................................... 65

4.3.4 Medical treatment ............................................................................................................ 67

4.3.5 Vocational training and employment ............................................................................... 68

5. Discussion................................................................................................................................. 70

5.1 Discussion of results ............................................................................................................... 70

5.2 Limitations of research and recommendations for further investigation ................................ 76

6. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 78

Bibliography ................................................................................................................................ 80

Annexes ........................................................................................................................................ 88

Annex 1: Principles of effective prevention and correctional treatment through direct service

(Andrews, 1995) ........................................................................................................................... 88

Annex 2: Cuestionario de entrevista (original version topic list) ................................................. 89

Annex 3: Topic list (English version) ........................................................................................... 90

Annex 4: Coding tree .................................................................................................................... 91

Annex 5: List of respondents ........................................................................................................ 93

Annex 6: Completed conceptual framework ................................................................................ 95

IV

List of abbreviations

ADE Aide à la Décision Economique Belgium (Analysis for Economic Decisions)

AJH-USAID Alianza Joven Honduras (Youth Alliance Honduras) – United States Agency for

International Development

AP Alianza Patriótica Hondureña (Honduran Patriotic Alliance)

B18 Barrio 18

CAP Chicago Area Project

COFADEH Comité de Familiares de Detenidos Desaparecidos en Honduras (Committee of

Relatives of the Detained and Disappeared in Honduras)

COIPRODEN Coordinación de Instituciones Privadas por las Niñas, Niños, Adolescentes,

Jóvenes y sus Derechos (Coordination of Private Institutions for Girls, Boys,

Adolescents, Youngsters and their Rights)

CPTRT Centro de Prevención Tratamiento y Rehabilitación de Víctimas de la Tortura y

sus familiares (Center for Prevention, Treatment and Rehabilitation of Victims of

Torture and their Families)

DC Partido Demócrata Cristiano de Honduras (Christian Democratic Party of

Honduras)

FAPER Frente Amplio Político en Resistencia (Broad Front in Political Resistance)

FUNDASALVA Fundación Antidrogas de El Salvador (Antidrug Foundation of El

Salvador)

G.R.E.A.T. Gang Resistance Education and Training

IHNFA Instituto Hondureño de la Niñez y la Familia (Honduran Institute for Family and

Children)

ILANUD Insituto Latinoamericano de las Naciones Unidas para la Prevención del Delito y

el Tratamiento del Delincuente (United Nations Latin American Institute for the

Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders)

IUDPAS Instituto Universitario en Democracía, Paz y Seguridad (University Institute on

Democracy, Peace and Security)

JHA-JA Asociación Jóvenes Hondureños-Juntos Avancemos (Honduran Youth

Association-Together Moving Forward)

V

LIBRE Partido Libertad y Refundación (Liberty and Refoundation)

M18 Mara 18

MS13 Mara Salvatrucha 13

NGO Non-governmental organization

OAS Organization of American States

PAC Partido Anti Corrupción (Anti-Corruption Party)

PINU Partido Innovación y Unidad (Innovation and Unity Party)

PL Partido Liberal de Honduras (Liberal Party of Honduras)

PN Partido Nacional de Honduras (National Party of Honduras)

PNPRRS Programa Nacional de Prevención Rehabilitación y Reinserción Social (National

Program for Prevention Rehabilitation and Social Reintegration)

PRB Population Reference Bureau

UD Unificación Democrática (Democratic Unification)

UNAH Universidad Naiconal Autónoma de Honduras (National Autonomous University

of Hondura)

UNDP United Nations Development Program

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund

UNODC United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime

USAID United States Agency for International Development

VI

List of annexes

Annex 1: Principles of effective prevention and correctional treatment through direct service

(Andrews, 1995)

Annex 2: Cuestionario de entrevista (original version topic list)

Annex 3: Topic list (English version)

Annex 4: Coding tree

Annex 5: List of respondents

Annex 6: Completed conceptual framework

1

1. Introduction

Honduras and its neighboring countries El Salvador and Guatemala are highly affected by the

violence of gangs and drug traffickers. With 90.4 murders per 100.000 citizens, Honduras has the

highest homicide rate of the world. Gang related homicides have even increased the past years

and Honduras currently accounts for most gang related murders (30 per 100.000 citizens).1 In

Honduras’ neighboring country, El Salvador, the two rivaling gangs Mara Salvatrucha 13 and

Barrio 18 agreed upon a truce, which caused an immediate decrease of homicides and other gang

related violence. A similar truce was implemented in Honduras, but it did not result in a lower

homicide rate (UNODC, 2013). Though according to Salvadoran citizens, the alleged truce has

barely, if at all, reduced the delinquency rate in El Salvador (IUDOP, 2012).

In a country where 20% of the youngsters are not studying and are likely to get involved in a

gang (Floresi, Mejía, Mejía, SJ & Serrano, 2004), not very many financial efforts have been

made to protect these vulnerable youngsters. Nearly 200 million dollar (4137.1 million Honduran

Lempira) or 4.6% of the central administration expenses of Honduras, goes to security (i.e. the

police forces), whereas only 308 thousand (6.4 million Lempira) or less than 0.01% of the central

administration expenses is spent on the national program of prevention, rehabilitation and social

reintegration (Secretaría de Finanzas, 2013).

Many studies have already been done on the origin, creation and activities of youth gangs as

such, but not as many on the reintegration processes of youth gang members (Wood & Alleyne,

2010). Therefore the goal of this research is to focus mainly on the reintegration of youth gang

members, by investigating which intervention methods are effective in helping gang members to

reintegrate into society. In order to understand these processes of reintegration, attention will

also go to the context of gang membership, i.e. reasons for youngsters to join a gang.

The main research question is: ‘How can the reintegration of young gang members into society

best be facilitated?’ In order to respond this research question, following sub questions will be

investigated:

1. For what reasons can young gang members leave the gang?

1 Exact numbers of gang related crime are not available, as national crime statistics make no distinction between

homicides committed by gang members or non-gang members (UNAH-IUDPAS, 2013).

2

2. which intervention methods can facilitate young gang members in their process of

leaving the gang and reintegrate in society?

Qualitative methods are used to gather research data. In accordance with the guidelines of KU

Leuven and for the safety of the researcher, gang member and local informant, gang members or

ex-gang members as such are not interviewed. Rather, data are gathered by interviewing

Honduran social workers who work with (ex-) gang members in a reintegration program or

academics whom have studied the reintegration processes of youth gang members. The goal of

this investigation is to find out which programs, focusing on the reintegration of (ex-) gang

members, are available in Honduras, which intervention methods are used and which of these

methods are effective when taking into account the specific setting of the intervention.

The content of this dissertation is divided into five sections: the literature review, the

methodology section, the results, discussion, and conclusion.

The first section is the literature review, which is also subdivided into four parts. Firstly, in order

to have a better view on the broader problem of gangs in the region of Central America, we will

discuss the rise of youth gangs (maras and pandillas) in Central America, along with their

specific characteristics. Secondly, we will elucidate the political and socio-economic situation in

Honduras, which can be seen as a fertile ground for the formation of youth gangs across the

country. Thirdly, we will outline criminological theories on gangs, in order to have a background

to which the situation in Central America and Honduras can be related. This part is followed by a

discussion on theories of rehabilitation and reintegration of young gang members. This last part

will also focus on the specific situation in Honduras.

The second section is the methodology section, which is also subdivided into three parts. The

first part defines the central problem and the main research questions. The second part contains

the conceptual framework which is applied for the analysis of the data. The third part will

highlight which research design is used; discussing the methods, sample, data collection and

analysis, and the quality of the research.

The third section contains the main results from the data analysis. In the fourth section these

results are compared to the findings of the literature review and open up the discussion between

the literature and the field research. The last section contains a conclusion of the thesis, where

final remarks and suggestions for further research are made.

3

2. Literature review

The literature review contains four main sections. The first section gives a general introduction

of the phenomenon of maras and pandillas in Central America. The second section elucidates

the political and socio-economic situation in Honduras. The third section gives an overview of

the existing criminological theories of gangs. The fourth section focuses on theories of

rehabilitation and reintegration of gang members.

The literature review starts from the perspective of local sources, in order to represent the

perception of Central American investigators in the field of maras and pandillas. These

perspectives are subsequently compared to other international studies and findings.

2.1 Maras and Pandillas in Central America

Maras and pandillas are present in all Central American countries, but most of all in El Salvador,

Guatemala and Honduras. There is no official definition of gangs upon which criminologists

have agreed (Katz, 2004).2 With the concepts maras and pandillas we refer to juvenile gangs in

Central America. Though there is some disagreement regarding the meaning and difference

between the terms mara and pandilla. According to Aplícano Cubero (2012), the concepts of

mara and pandilla are merely synonyms and thus refer to the same phenomenon.3 But according

to Cruz (2010) and Rodgers, Muggah and Stevenson (2009), there certainly is a difference

between maras and pandillas.4 In this dissertation we refer to maras and pandillas as synonyms

for juvenile gangs.

2 According to Eurogang “a street gang (or troublesome youth group corresponding to a street gang elsewhere) is

any durable, street-oriented youth group whose involvement in illegal activity is part of its group identity”

(Weerman, Maxson, Esbensen, Aldridge, Medina & van Gemert, 2009, p. 20). 3 Aplícano Cubero (2012) states that the word mara is derived from “marabunta”, an African ant that attacks in

group. The concept pandilla would refer to a group of people who have a close relation and share the same

philosophy. As friends, they take action in group, which contains for example going out to party, but also

committing crimes and even murder. 4 Rodgers, Muggah and Stevenson (2009, p. 6) state that maras “are a phenomenon with transnational roots” and

can be found in Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala. This is closely related to Cruz’s definition of maras. In his

opinion maras are “a vast network of groups of people associated with the identity franchises of two street gangs

that had their origins in the city of Los Angeles in the United States, but whose development no longer depends upon

the American dynamics: the Mara Salvatrucha Thirteen (MS-13) and the Eighteenth Street Gang (also known as

Barrio 18)”. MS13 emerged from a division of Barrio 18 (Cruz, 2010, p. 382, 384). Pandillas, on the other hand,

“are more localized, home-grown gangs that are the direct inheritors of the youth gangs that have been a historic

feature of Central American societies. Pandillas were initially present throughout the region in the post-conflict

period but are now only significantly visible in Nicaragua – and to a lesser extent in Costa Rica (where they are

often called ‘chapulines’)” (Rodgers, Muggah & Stevenson, 2009, p. 6).

4

In this section we discuss the rise of maras and pandillas in Central America, along with their

characteristics.

2.1.1 The rise of maras and pandillas in Central America

There is some disagreement regarding the origins of Central American maras and pandillas.

Some say they migrated from the United States, others say they have always been present in

Central America. In this section, both visions will be discussed.

Dr. José Miguel Cruz (2010) states that maras exist due to local conditions as well as

transnational processes. With local conditions, Cruz points out the processes of marginalization

and law enforcement strategies. With transnational processes, he means the migration flows and

the spreading of Southern California gang identities. Via these migration flows, there was an

exchange of norms and values between US and Central American gangs. Reisman (2006)

confirms the fact that the Mara Salvatrucha (13) and Barrio 18 have their roots in Los Angeles.

Between the 1970s and 1980s a lot of Central American citizens fled due to civil war, violence,

extreme poverty and discrimination in their country. Many of them ended up in Los Angeles,

where they were confronted with poverty, marginality and a language they barely spoke. They

had the feeling they needed to defend themselves against the already existing Mexican and

African-American gangs. These living circumstances were a facilitating factor to enter the

Pandilla 18 or Mara Salvatrucha. Several year later, in the late 1990s, the US reformed their

migration legislation, which made it possible to deport both legal and illegal non-US citizens –

who violated the law of their country of residence – to their countries of origin, after they served

their sentence in a US prison. This caused an increase of maras and pandillas in Central America

from the year 2000 onwards. During this expulsion flow, there was no sufficient communication

between the US and Central America, concerning the US’s deportation strategy. Furthermore,

the authorities of these Central American countries were not given any warning about the

criminal background of the people who were sent back, and thus could not react in a appropriate

manner. They did not have adequate resources to respond to this sudden growth of, mainly

young, citizens (Aplícano Cubero, 2012; PNPRRS, 2011; Reisman, 2006).

These processes had a lot of impact on the deported migrants and their ‘new’ environment. Many

of the expelled youngsters have had contacts with the Pandilla 18 and Mara Salvatrucha. Once

5

these youngsters arrived in their native country, barely speaking Spanish, they rapidly got

involved in the Central American gangs. These gangs often provided the youngsters with the

things they needed, which the state could not always offer. They also gave them the opportunity

to be part of a group and develop their social identity (PNPRRS, 2011; Reisman, 2006).

According to Aplícano Cubero (2012) most of these youngsters had to live in poor urban areas,

which was an ideal breeding ground to put in practice the experiences they learned from the

gangs in Miami and Los Angeles. These recently migrated youngsters had several characteristics

in common: being a Latino, no access to education, healthcare or public services; highly

discriminated and with a sense of social belonging.

According to the National Program for Prevention Rehabilitation and Social

Reintegration/PNPRRS (2011) the phenomenon of maras and pandillas is not completely caused

by the deportation flow of migrants from the US. As early as the fifties and sixties, there were

youngsters who came together as a group to defend ‘their’ territory. The main difference with

contemporary gangs is that they were not using firearms. In the seventies, when more gangs

emerged, the use of alcohol, cigarettes and drugs also started to be incorporated in the gang life.

Back then, those groups already had their own system of rules and sanctions, and initiation rites.

Gangs came and went, but they never caused major national problems.

Cruz (2010) agrees that there were already gangs in Central America, before the migration flow

started in 1980, and the deportation of US immigrants to Central America in 1990.

Notwithstanding the foregoing however, he says these migration flows did help to transfer the

US gang culture and the solidarity to the gang. The maras in El Salvador, Guatemala and

Honduras took over the habits, norms and values of the US gangs. However, the PNPRRS (2011)

states there are still differences between the group dynamics of the Californian Pandilla 18 and

Mara Salvatrucha, who were much more violent than the former Honduran gangs. According to

them the Californian gangs were characterized by violence, conflicts with the law and crime,

detention sentences, hospitalizations and death. The gangs implemented strict rules and the

punishment for leaving the gang was death.

2.1.2 The phenomenon of gangs in Central America

According to Reisman (2006) the presence of gangs in Central America has to do with several

socio-economic reasons: “armed conflicts, poverty, U.S. deportation policy, and a host of other

6

explanatory factors” (Reisman, 2006, p. 150). Also, youngsters have limited access to education

and job opportunities. A gang can provide often answers to the financial and other needs of these

youngsters and give them a sense of belonging.

This section discusses the amount of gangs present in Honduras, their structural organization,

activities and the reasons for youngsters to join a gang.

2.1.2.1 Structural organization of maras and pandillas

The two most common gangs in Honduras (Pandilla 18 and Mara Salvatrucha) differ in their

internal structure. According to Aplícano Cubero (2012), the Pandilla 18 is characterized by

homogeneity and stability, which make it possible to create standardized rules, principles of

organization and communication networks. The Mara Salvatrucha on the other hand, is

characterized by diversity, independence and originality, which give the gang members the

opportunity to distinguish them from the other subgroups or cliques.

According to several investigations (Aplícano Cubero, 2012; PNPRRS, 2011; Proyecto Victoria,

2013), gangs are well structured and good organized groups, with a defined hierarchy, who form

a brotherhood and respect the norms, rules and codes thereof. They perform by a certain code of

conduct and their main goal is to maintain and dominate what they consider to be ‘their

territory’. The maras and pandillas are organized according to the following hierarchy: every

neighborhood (barrio) has his own clique (clica),5 which is led by chiefs and sub chiefs (jefe and

sub jefes). Additionally, there are the members of the gang (hommies or homeboys),6 who are

responsible for the implementation of the commands of the chiefs as well as a coordinator

(coordinador), who is in charge of the facilitation of the relations between the other members

and responsible for the supervision on the fulfillment of the rules inside the group. This hierarchy

refers to a form of a closed organization, whereby there is little or no transparency toward the

community. In order not to be identified, cliques perform their activities (e.g. drug and arm

trafficking, assassinations, etc.) in neighborhoods other than where their own clique is located.

The structure of the gang becomes explicit in their authority. Maras and pandillas operate via

two forms of authority: individually and in group. The individual authority can be observed in

5 Barrios are slums or “socially disadvantaged neighborhoods”, where most of the maras flourish (Cruz, 2010,

p.394). 6 Hommie comes from the English Word ‘homeboy’. It is used when referring to male gang members (Interpeace,

2013).

7

the clique, where the leader (líder or cabecilla) is in charge. Since a lot of gang leaders are

locked up in prison, tasks are often delegated from prison, because the leaders are still in power

and the members need to obey with their leaders’ commands. The group authority consists of the

meetings, where the leaders of the cliques take important decisions. The fulfillment of these

decisions are mandatory, those who do not comply will be punished. A very severe breach of the

rules such as, for example, betrayal can even be punished with death (Aplícano Cubero, 2012;

PNPRRS, 2011).

Before a youngster is accepted in a gang, he needs to go through a social process of

indoctrination and adaption of the behavior of the group. It can take some years before the

youngster can obtain a certain level in the gang. The amount of participation one gets in a group

depends on the amount of trust he has earned.

The report of the PNPRRS (2011) outlines the hierarchical structure of gangs. This structure is

confirmed by other research (Proyecto Victoria, 2013). The structure of maras and pandillas

consists of different hierarchical levels and a member need to go through the different stages

before he can reach the top. Five levels of participation can be distinguished: the sympathizer (el

Simpathizante), the aspirant (el Aspirante), the rookie (el Novato), the permanent gang member

(el Pandillero Permanente) and the leader (el Líder or Cabecilla). Simpatizantes are youngsters,

aged 10-16 years old, who live in the neighborhood where a certain gang is active and they

admire these gang members for their power and way of living. Simpatizantes do not form part of

the gang. Still on a low level, but closer to the gang, is the function of el Aspirante. El Aspirante

is part of the gang, but does not participate in the local or national meetings. Aspirantes are

mainly being used as bandera, which means that they have to guard the borders of their

neighborhood and report to the gang who enters and leaves ‘the gang’s territory’. Their

commitment to the group (and possibility to go to the next level) will be evaluated over a period

of one to three years. When the Aspirante goes through the initiation process (el bautizo),7 he

becomes el Novato. This means he forms part of the gang and there is no way back, but he still

needs to earn the confidence of the group. The main activity of el Novato is collecting the

impuesto de guerra. El Novato has one year to adapt himself to the lifestyle and rules of his new

7 The initiation process contains being beaten up for 13 (MS13) or 18 (M18) seconds. Women who want to enter the

gang can chose between a 13 or 18 seconds of beating (la paliza) or 13 or 18 seconds having sex with several gang

members (Interpeace, 2013; IUDOP, 2010).

8

family. As a Novato you can still have contact with your family, but once you are a Pandillero

Permanente, you have to cut all family ties, because you are living with a new family now.

Pandilleros Permanentes have to do more important (and also more dangerous) tasks. They are

also willing to die for their fellow gang members. Finally, the Líder or Cabecilla is the one who

is at the top of the gang. A gang member can get to this level by committing cruelties and being

feared and respected by the other members.

2.1.2.2 Gangs in numbers

This section gives an overview of the total estimated amount of gang members in Honduras. It

also discusses the average age to join a gang and the distribution of men and women within a

gang.

Numbers of gang members differ across research, depending on statistical research implemented

by governmental or non-governmental organizations. The PNPRRS, for example, applies a very

low estimate of the amount of gang members in Honduras. According to them 4281 maras are

out on the streets and 447 gang members are incarcerated. They state that the Mara Salvatrucha

and Pandilla 18 take 97% of all Honduran gang members for their account. More specifically,

49% belong to the Mara Salvatrucha and 48% belong to the Pandilla 18. Most of the gang

members are located in San Pedro Sula (63-60%) and in Tegucigalpa (19-22%). Though

PNPRRS admits these numbers are far from complete due to a lack of other investigations

(PNPRRS, 2011). The statistics of the PNPRRS do not include the number of youngsters who

sympathize with a gang (simpatizantes). Rubio (2002) states there are at least 30.000

simpatizantes in Honduras. According to UNODC (2012), 12.000 gang members (7000 of the

MS13 and 5000 of the B18) are active in Honduras. USAID (2012) estimates that 35.000 gang

members are located in Honduras.

Most research determines the common age to join a gang is between 12 and 25 years old.

According to Merino’s (2004) research, the average age to join a gang is between 13 and 16

years old. The PNPRRS (2011), on the other hand, claims that 77% of the youngsters enter a

gang before the age of 15. Though, almost all gang members (97.8%) are in between 12 and 25

9

years old.8 Equally so, Eurogang focuses on youth between the age of 12 and 25 years old, in

their Youth Survey on gang membership (Weerman, Maxson, Esbensen, Aldridge, Medina &

van Gemert, 2009). In order to include a broad range of gang members, and taking into account

the above measurements, we will maintain the age of 12 till 25 years old as indicator of this

research.

According to Proyecto Victoria (2013) it is easier to work with young gang members or

youngsters who have not been baptized yet. Aspirantes and simpatizantes have a 75% chance to

leave the gang. After going through the initiation ritual, novatos only have a 50% chance to leave

the gang, permanent members no more than 25% and leaders have almost no chance (5%) to

leave the gang.

Research indicates men as well as women are active within a gang (Proyecto Victoria, 2013).

According to the PNPRRS (2011) most gang members are male (80%), only a smaller part of the

gang consists of females (20%). The role of female gang members differs in some aspects from

that of male gang members. Female members are often violated via sexual abuse within the

gang, but they are also violators towards others. For example, female gang members are often

given the task to collect the ‘war tax’ or impuesto de Guerra (IUDOP, 2010).9

2.1.2.3 Gang activities

According to Merino (2004), the gang as such is not bad, but they often commit violent crimes.

Fortunately, not every youngster who is part of a gang commits these crimes, which can be an

important aspect regarding their rehabilitation process.

The mutual fights between the different gangs are often to protect their territory (Merino, 2004).

This implies that gang violence is limited to the area where the gang operates, i.e. the area which

the gang arrogates. According to Cruz (2010), violence that extends beyond the boundaries of the

barrio would be futile, because the violence is mainly used to protect the borders of the barrio.

The so-called ‘war taxes’ (impuestos de guerra) or ‘protection taxes’ are raised from small

businesses, transportation units and even from people, in order to be able to fund the mara

8 Ley para la prevención, rehabilitación y reinserción social de personas integrantes de maras o pandillas,

Exposición de Motivos, p. 3. 9 According to InSight Crime “criminal organizations reportedly “tax” businesses according to how much profit

they make. A small shop or market stall must pay around $7.50 a week, larger ones $10, and shop owners $15”

(Wells, 2013).

10

expenses (Cruz, 2010). Interpeace (2013) states that mainly female gang members are used to

collect the taxes, as they look more innocent than male pandilleros and thus raise less suspicion

among bystanders. According to Cruz (2010), (international) drug dealing was not the main

purpose of Central American maras and pandillas, but due to the Mano Dura pursuing of gangs,

the maras felt the need to unite with drug cartels.

2.1.2.4 Reasons to join a gang

Several factors are related to the ingression of youngsters in juvenile gangs: armed conflicts and

violence whereby youngsters have the feeling they need to be protected, weak family ties and

domestic violence, poverty, and the exclusion from good formal education and the legal job

market (Santacruz Giralt, Concha-Eastman & Homies Unidos, 2001). According to the research

of Interpeace (2013), boys and girls share the same reasons to join a gang, though for girls sexual

violence can also be a factor to seek for refuge within a gang.

According to Merino (2004) and confirmed by the research of Santacruz Giralt, Concha-Eastman

and Homies Unidos (2001), youngsters get involved in a gang, because they consider the gang as

a place where they can belong, because people understand how they feel and what they think.

There is much solidarity between the members. If you are hungry or you don’t have a place to

stay, the other members will take care of you. “Uno para todos y todos para uno” (Merino,

2004, p.128-129). According to Aplícano Cubero (2012), this feeling of solidarity and belonging

to a group is attractive, because human beings are species who are used to live in groups.

However, not all youngsters are seeking this sense of belonging in school or in a sports club, but

rather in a gang. Because they can’t fight justice in court, they go for street justice. As well as

every youngster, they want to be wealthy, but instead of trying to achieve this by getting an

education or a job, they rather take it from those who are already rich. This process is mainly

enhanced by the consumption society in which these youngsters live,10

the weak educational

system and the corruption in the distribution of public funds.

As indicated above, people are social human beings, who like to get together as a group. This is

the same reason why youngsters get involved with maras and pandillas. Maras and pandillas

can be identified as a group by: the feeling of brotherhood, respect for the group norms, and

10

For more information on the relation between crime and consumerism, read Keith Hayward’s City Limits: Crime,

Consumer Culture and the Urban Experience.

11

being moved by the same goals (e.g. defense of the territory). Other group characteristics are:

creating personal relationships, sharing the same sympathies and antipathies towards other

people or groups, loyalty and solidarity, which also refers to the feeling of responsibility and

defense of the group. Children and youngsters admire maras and pandillas for several reasons:

their social status, the maintenance in livelihood, a place to find refuge and shelter, access to

food on a daily basis, the feeling of being proud, finding satisfaction and being accepted

(PNPRRS, 2011).

According to Cruz (2010), the reasons to join a gang and the gang activities have changed over

the years. In the 1980s and 1990s, youngsters who were in search for their identity, found a sense

of belonging in a gang. At the beginning of the 21st century, mareros could find solidarity,

respect and support in a gang, but more important to note is the increase of instrumental violence

with a more economic purpose. In 2005 MS13 and B18 became actual criminal organizations,

which main purpose was to preserve control on the criminal economy. In 2006, the gangs had

completely developed their extortion practices. There is also a remarkable shift in the victim

groups which suffer from the gang related crimes. In the 1990s the victims of gang violence were

mainly opponent gang members. Nowadays the maras use violence towards everyone who is not

willing to cooperate with their extortion practices.

The previous section describes the context of gang members in Central America in general; their

structural organization, characteristics and reasons of existence. The next section focuses on the

specific situation of maras and pandillas in Honduras.

2.2 The situation in Honduras

As discussed in the previous section, gangs were able to flourish in Central America due to

several socio-economic factors, but also due to the political situation. According to Reisman

(2006) and Rodgers, Muggah and Stevenson (2009), Central American countries share the same

culture of machismo. There is a lot of social inequality and poverty. These countries suffered

from regional, national and international wars, followed by relocation to other countries to solely

being deported to their home countries again. There are a lot of weapons available and people

cannot rely upon their state. Also, youngsters have limited access to education and job

opportunities and a gang can often answer to the financial and other needs of these youngsters

12

and give them a sense of belonging to their group. The following section discusses the political

and socio-economic situation in Honduras.

2.2.1 The political situation in Honduras

In this subsection we discuss the history of politics in Honduras, along with their legislation and

gang prevention or intervention measurements, and the subsequent processes of stigmatization.

2.2.1.1 Honduran politics

Honduras was ‘discovered’ by Christopher Columbus in 1502 and colonized by Spain from 1522

until 1821. Since their independence on September 15th

1821, Honduras has suffered almost 300

internal rebellions, civil wars and governments’ changes. More than half of it took place in the

20th

century (UNDP, n.d.).

Honduras was led by the military from 1963 until 1981, during which the Football War with El

Salvador took place.11

Since 1981, Honduras is in a transition from the military regime towards

the establishment of a democratic regime (ADE, 2011). In 1981 a new law for general elections

(Ley Electoral y de las Organizaciones Políticas) was passed, along with a new Constitution.

During the 1980s and 1990s the military was reformed and submitted to the democratic elective

power of the people. Since 1981 general elections for the presidency were held every four years

and for more than 30 years the Liberal and alternately the National Party rules the country (Cruz

& Macías, 2004). After almost three decades of uninterrupted democratic elections, a coup d’état

in 2009 reminds the country of its fragile democracy. Though Manuel Zelaya, the former

president until 2009, belonged to the Liberal Party, he implemented a different way of

governing, which was frowned upon by the elite of the country. Zelaya was more concerned with

the poor and marginalized people of the country, instead of favoring the wealthier strata in the

country. For example, Zelaya lowered the fuel prices (which was in favor for the consumer, but

not for the transnational companies) and raised the minimum wage. The Honduran elite saw their

interests shrinking and subsequently implemented a coup against their President, which brought

11

In July 1969, during the pre-elections of the 1970 FIFA World Cup, the military of El Salvador attacked Honduras

on July 14th

, for 100 hours. This war was not caused by the FIFA elections as such, but by a long lasting dispute of

territory and migration. The population of El Salvador was growing and many Salvadorians, who were living on

Honduran territory, were forced to return to their country of origin. The latter was an impulse for El Salvador to

attack Honduras. The OAS mediated a ceasefire, which was implemented on July 20th (Posada & López, 1993).

13

Roberto Micheletti to Presidency, until Porfirio ‘Pepe’ Lobo Sosa (National Party) was elected in

January 2010 (Cálix, 2010).12

Currently, there are nine political parties in Honduras (from left to right): FAPER (Frente

Amplio Político en Resistencia), LIBRE (Partido Libertad y Refundación), UD (Unificación

Democrática), PINU (Partido Innovación y Unidad), DC (Partido Demócrata Cristiano de

Honduras), PAC (Partido Anti Corrupción), PL (Partido Liberal de Honduras), AP (Alianza

Patriótica Hondureña) and PN (Partido Nacional de Honduras). In the 2013 elections, the UD

and FAPER formed a coalition (http://www.honduras.com/honduras-elections-2013-the-

campaign-officially-begins/). On Sunday the 24th of November Honduras elected their new

President, Juan Orlando Hernández, of the National Party (J., 2013).

2.2.1.2 Honduran legislation and gang prevention or intervention measurements

As mentioned in the previous part, Honduras is alternately governed by the Liberal and National

Party. The different administrations reflect a different way of dealing with the phenomenon of

maras and pandillas.

From 1998 until 2002, Honduras was governed by President Carlos Roberto Flores Facussé.

Carlos Flores (Liberal Party) was aware of the fact that repressive measurements are not

effective in tackling the violence and crime generated by maras and pandillas. According to

Flores, the problem needed to be handled by focusing on the underlying causes; this is why he

implemented the Law for the prevention, rehabilitation and social reintegration of members from

maras and pandillas (Ley para la prevención, rehabilitación y reinserción social de personas

integrantes de maras o pandillas).13

This law also provided the country with the legal foundation

of the National Program for Prevention Rehabilitation and Social Reintegration (Programa

Nacional de Prevención, Rehabilitación y Reinserción Social, PNPRRS), which aims to prevent,

rehabilitate and reintegrate members from maras and pandillas.14

12

On June 28th 2009, President Manuel ‘Mel’ Zelaya Rosales was arrested by the military, under an arrest warrant

of the Honduran Supreme Court of Justice, and expelled from the country. Most of the countries around the world

condemned this coup d’etat and didn’t acknowledge the President ad interim, Roberto Micheletti (also from the

Liberal Party). This affected the country, because a lot of international organizations suspended their loans and aid

programs for Honduras (Llanos & Marsteintredet, 2010). 13

Ley Octubre 31 2001 para la prevención, rehabilitación y reinserción social de personas integrantes de maras o

pandillas, Exposición de Motivos, p. 2, http://pdba.georgetown.edu/Security/citizensecurity/honduras/leyes/8.pdf 14

Art. 2, Ley Octubre 31 2001 para la prevención, rehabilitación y reinserción social de personas integrantes de

maras o pandillas.

14

From 2002 until 2006, President Ricardo Rodolfo Maduro Joest (National Party) governed the

republic. Maduro implemented a harsher strategy towards the maras and pandillas in his

country, which was known as a ‘Zero Tolerance’ (Cero Tolerancia) policy. In 2003 he changed

the article 332 of the Criminal Code of Honduras,15

making it possible for the police to arrest and

detain people who they suspected to form part of a gang (Carranza, 2006). The reformation of

article 332 of the Criminal Code was soon referred to as the law Mano Dura (‘Hard Hand’) or

Anti-gang law (Ley Antimaras).

According to Aplícano Cubero (2012) and Samayoa (2011), the implementation of the Mano

Dura law was the start of a severe ‘war against crime’. They argue that instead of reducing the

crime rates, Maduro fostered processes of stigmatization by focusing on youngsters from

marginalized and poor neighborhoods, who were suspected to form part of a gang due to their

looks and language. According to Reisman (2006), the failure of Maduro’s Zero Tolerance

campaign caused the loss of the National Party during the elections in 2006. President Manuel

Zelaya (Liberal Party) won the 2006 elections and, just like Carlos Flores, he implemented a less

repressive, but more balanced approach in dealing with the problem of youth gangs.

Porfirio ‘Pepe’ Lobo Sosa (National Party) was elected in 2010. In 2012 he implemented the

‘Honduras for life’ (‘Honduras por la vida’) project, which aimed at reducing the violence and

murders in Honduras, by focusing on social inequalities, injustice and the lack of solidarity

between citizens. Porfirio Lobo also declared he wanted to tackle the corruption in the country

(El Heraldo, 2012). In 2013 Porfirio Lobo praised the efforts of Bishop Rómulo Emiliani and

OAS ambassador Adam Blackwell, regarding the so-called truce between the Mara Salvatrucha

and Calle 18. Lobo stated that the government would assist in this process, but that it is not a

permanent solution to reduce the culture of violence in Honduras (Centinela Económico, 2013).

The current president, Juan Orlando Hernández, which was elected in November 2013, focuses

on the strengthening of investigation methods and installed more supervision cameras. He also

focuses on the insecurity of public transport, by targeting at the elimination of the ‘war taxes’

(‘impuestos de guerra’), which are raised by the gangs. In line with Lobo’s ‘Honduras for life’

project, Juan Orlanda implemented in January 2014 the ‘Everyone for a Better Life Plan’

program (‘Plan de Todos para una Vida Mejor’), which includes the ‘Better Living with

Chambas’ (‘Con Chambas Vivís Mejor’). The ‘Better Living with Chambas’ program aims to

15

Art. 332, Código Penal de Honduras, http://www.oas.org/dil/esp/Codigo_Penal_Honduras.pdf

15

generate 800.000 jobs, equally so for those youngsters who are unemployed, in order to give

them a better prospect for the future, and at the same time reduce delinquency in the country

(Gobierno de la República de Honduras, 2014).

Despite these good intentions, Durán Chavarría (2012) states there is a general lack of preventive

measurements in dealing with juvenile delinquency and he emphasizes the importance of

preventive projects to prevent children and youngsters from committing a crime and enrolling

into the juvenile justice system.

2.2.1.3 Processes of stigmatization

As mentioned in the previous part, the Mano Dura law fostered processes of stigmatization of

youngsters living in deprived areas. Aplícano Cubero (2012) argues that due to the Anti-gang

Law a lot of youngsters have been (and still are) highly discriminated. Youngsters could be

labeled as a gang member for trivial reasons: their physical appearance and way of clothing; the

use of graffiti, symbols and body language; and being tattooed. The focus on these elements

created a severe repression by the police, which affected (alleged) gang members as well as other

(innocent) children and youngsters. According to Aplícano Cubero (2012) this is the reason why

gang members stopped tattooing themselves. They do not want to be identified as a marero or

pandillero and prefer to operate more in secrecy.

Extrajudicial executions are a consequence of these processes of stigmatization. According to

Samayoa (2011), extrajudicial executions are not a new phenomenon in Honduras. During the

1980s and the beginning of the 1990s, when the country was still in the transition from a military

towards a democratic regime (ADE, 2011), public security forces (Fuerza de Seguridad Pública)

committed human rights violations, including extrajudicial executions. The national forces were

preoccupied with organized crime and street violence, whereby they targeted youngsters who

were often been accused for allegedly belonging to a gang. As from the 1990s onwards and with

the creation of the Mano Dura law, the police put into operation the war against crime. As

already mentioned, due to the reformation of article 332 of the Criminal Code of Honduras,

many youngsters who were accused of forming part of a gang, just because of their looks, were

extrajudicially been arrested, detained and sometimes even executed. Also civilian militias, who

took the power in their hands, were found guilty of extrajudicial executions of young so-called

gang members.

16

2.2.2 The socio-economic situation in Honduras

With more or less 8.4 million people, Honduras is a small republic (112.492 km²) in Central

America, with El Salvador, Guatemala and Nicaragua as neighboring countries. The country has

a population growth rate of 2.03% (in 2012). More than half (66.5%) of the Honduran

households are living in poverty, of which more than 40% live in extreme poverty, and 54.1% of

the people are underemployed (UNDP, n.d.). In 2011, 36% of the Honduran population had to

live with less than $2 a day (PRB, n.d.) and the country’s Gross National Income (GNI), based

on the Purchasing Power Parity (PPP), was $3.820 in 2012 (The World Bank, n.d.).

Honduras consists of a young population. Almost 50% of the Honduran population has not even

reached the age of 20 years. According to the PNPRRS (2011), 14.3% of these minors are

involved in child labor and 25.4%, or 700 000 Honduran adolescents, remain without any form

of formal education.16

According to Aplícano Cubero (2012), this makes them vulnerable for

alternative lifestyles, like joining a mara or pandilla. Moreover, this vulnerability increases due

to the fact that families suffer from the impact of poverty, marginality, migration and violence,

and not to forget, a lot of children are being raised in families without a father and/or mother.17

The assassination rates in Honduras have increased over the past ten years. In 2005, there were

37 murders per 100 000 citizens and in 2012 this amount has increased to 85.5 murders per 100

000 citizens. By contrast, the assassination rates on Latin American level are much lower: 18

murders per 100 000 citizens (Aplícano Cubero; IUDPAS, 2013). According to UNODC’s

(2013) Global Study on Homicide, the assassination rate in Honduras has raised to 90 per 100

000 during the past year.

The previous two sections describe the situation of maras and pandillas in the political and

socio-economic context of Honduras. In the next section we discuss criminological theories,

related to the subject of gangs and gang membership.

16

In 2010 24% of the young primary school-age children in Honduras dropped out of school before completing

primary school. Though Honduras was able to reduce this number, as in 2004, more than 45% dropped out of school

before finishing their primary grade (UNESCO, 2012). In 2009 the number of youngsters graduating from lower

secondary school was very low in Honduras (not more than 40%), comparing to the other countries in Latin America

(at least 80%) (UNESCO, 2011). 17

According to an investigation of UNICEF (2003), regarding children living in the streets, 60% had contact with

their mother, while only 18% had contact with their father.

17

2.3 Criminological theories of gangs

Although many general theories on gang formation and reasons to join a gang are available, not

as many discuss the reintegration or rehabilitation process of gang members. Criminological

theories on gangs can help us understand why a youngster gets involved with a gang.

Subsequently, we can better comprehend the reintegration processes of these youngsters, along

with its difficulties.

In the words of Wood and Alleyne (2010, p. 100): “our knowledge on gangs is still limited and

rather muddy”In their research on the existing knowledge of street gangs, they compare different

theories and elucidate what is still missing regarding the subject of gangs. This chapter is mainly

based upon their overview of criminological theories of gangs and completed with other

resources. The following criminological theories are discussed: socio-ecological theories, anomie

theories, social process theories, control theories and social reintegration theories. Theories of

risk factors are also discussed, in order to understand which factors are important when

discussing theories on rehabilitation and reintegration of gang members.

2.3.1 Socio-ecological theories

The Chicago School has done much research regarding socio-ecological aspects of criminology.

Among these researchers, Thrasher (1963), Burgess (1926) and Shaw and McKay (1969)

investigated and applied the theory of social disorganization in Chicago. On the basis of

Burgess’ (1926) model of concentric zones,18

Shaw and McKay (1969) discovered most juvenile

delinquency is committed in the central business district (zone I) and in the zone in transition

(zone II). Already in 1927, with his study on 1313 gang in Chicago, Thrasher (1927) stated the

zone in transition is the most disordered area, where most of Chicago’s gangs could be found.

Shaw and McKay (1969), as well as Thrasher (1927), agree upon the fact that youngsters who

grow up in these socially disorganized areas, where there is a lack of opportunities regarding

good schooling and jobs, are more likely to be attracted by gangs, which can provide them with

economic goods, a certain status and group company.

18

According to Burgess’s (1926) theory of Concentric Zones, Chicago can be divided into five concentric zones:

Zone I is the “central business and industrial district”; Zone II is the “zone in transition, or slum areas, in the

throes of change from residence to business and industry”; Zone III is the “zone of workingmen’s homes”; Zone IV

is the “residential zone”; and Zone V is the “outer commuters’ zone, beyond the city limits” (Shaw & McKay,

1969, p. 78).

18

Though the urban and economic developments in Chicago differ from the developments in cities

like San Pedro Sula and Tegucigalpa, some underlying factors, which stimulated youngsters to

join a gang, can be attributed to both contexts. For example, a child who grows up in a family

which neglects him, who goes to a school that is not able to trigger the individual in a positive

sense or provide him/her with after school activities to keep him occupied and away from the

street, will be more likely to get in contact with a gang. Thrasher (1963) emphasizes that these

factors do not directly push youngsters to join a gang, but gangs rather flourish in areas with

weak institutions thus providing young boys,19

living in these kinds of areas, with an alternative

way of living.

2.3.2 Anomie theories

Within the scope of anomie theories, several theories can be distinguished: the theories of strain,

subculture, and differential opportunities.

Both Merton (1938) and Agnew (1992) implemented a theory of strain. According to Merton

(1938), crime is a normal phenomenon, which can occur when there is a gap between the goals

one wants to achieve and the legal means he has within his reach to accomplish his goal. This

gap causes stress (strain), which the person wants to reduce, by achieving his goal. Though,

whether or not a person will use illegal means (and thus commit a crime) in order to reach his

goal, depends on the influence of social structures.

Agnew’s (1992) theory of strain, on the other hand, focuses on one’s negative relationships with

other people. According to Agnew (1992), a person can experience strain when he or she is being

impeded from achieving a “positively valued goal” (Agnew, 1992, p. 74). Also when the person

is confronted with negative stimuli or deprived from positive stimuli. In accordance with

Merton’s (1938) theory, whether or not a person will commit a crime, depends on the ability and

means one has to handle a certain form of strain in a legal way.

Within the theories of subculture, we discuss Matza’s (1964) drift theory, as well as Cohen’s

(1955) subculture theory. Cohen’s (1955) subculture theory can also be seen as a strain theory, as

he starts from the premise that all social classes in America are marked by the same aspiration of

19

Most literature focuses on male gang members, while female gang members often grow up in the same

environment. Subsequently, throughout the literature review we focus on male gang members, while keeping in

mind the same factors could also be applied to female gang members; but more research upon the distinction

between male and female gang members is necessary to confirm this assumption.

19

reaching a high social status (via the possession of economic goods), though the legal means to

achieve this goal are not equally distributed, which subsequently can lead to strain. This unequal

distribution of means causes a status frustration among youngsters who grow up in lower income

classes and might push them to reach their goals by using illegal means. This opens the way for

delinquent subcultures, as these subcultures can answer to the status frustration some youngsters

encounter. Cohen (1955) uses Whyte’s (1937) distinction between a corner boy and a college

boy, and completes it with the category of the delinquent subculture,20

to distinguish between

those who are more likely to be involved with a gang and those who are less likely to become

involved with a delinquent subculture.

According to Matza’s (1964) drift theory, a delinquent person “drifts between criminal and

conventional action” (Matza, 1964, p. 28). A person, in Matza’s opinion, is not completely in

control of his own decisions, but rather responds to external and internal drifts. Although the

deviant person is involved in criminal activities, this does not mean he cannot be involved in

conformist business at the same time. He drifts between the two possibilities of conformist and

non-conformist behavior, without taking any dedication or responsibility. The delinquent in

Matza’s view finds himself in a less tied social structure, which gives space to the creation of

(delinquent) subcultures. According to Matza, most juvenile delinquents deter from delinquency

when they mature. A youngster will probably leave the delinquent subculture when confronted

with a judicial penalty or simply because he finds himself a job or starts a relationship (Matza,

1964). Regarding the situation of gang members in Honduras, we can state that youngsters are

indeed influenced by internal (e.g. the desire for economic goods and friendship), as well as

external (e.g. a gang who can provide the youngster with a place to belong) factors to join a

gang.

Cloward and Ohlin (1960) situate their theory of differential opportunities partially in line with

and partially in extension of Merton’s (1938) anomie theory and Sutherland’s (1947) differential

20

According to Cohen (1955), the corner boy cherishes working-class values, but while the college boy also comes

from a working-class family, he does cherish middle-class values. As stated above, both boys want to achieve the

same goals, but do not have the same means to do so. Cohen argues, they can respond to this problem in three ways.

The first one is “to desert the corner-boy for the college-boy way of life” (Cohen, 1955, p. 128), by trying to fit into

the middle-class system. The second one is the “stable corner-boy response” (Cohen, 1955, p. 128), in which the

person accepts his life and tries to find comfort in the company of people from the same class. The third one is the

“delinquent response” (Cohen, 1955, p. 129), which means that the youngster rejects the middle-class values and

looks for an alternative status within a delinquent subculture (i.e. a gang). One of the main differences with the

college-boy and corner-boy is that the delinquent subculture authorizes violence.

20

association theory. The main difference is that, according to Cloward and Ohlin, the legal means

to achieve a certain goal are not only predisposed by social class (as stated by Merton, 1938).

Conform with Sutherland’s (1947) theory, the youngster must be exposed to a certain setting,

where he can learn either legitimate or illegitimate norms and rules, and this acquired behavior

must be encouraged and maintained by the peer group from which he adapted this attitude

(Cloward & Ohlin, 1960). Cloward and Ohlin (1960, p. 240) state that the appearance of a

delinquent subculture depends on whether or not violence and illegal activities form part of the

social structure of a certain area. In other words, the formation of a delinquent subculture

depends on the spread of legitimate as opposed to illegitimate means available to achieve a

particular goal in society. When the availability of illegitimate means (e.g. weapons) transcends

the availability of legitimate means, there will be more potential for delinquency to occur.

2.3.3 Social process theories

Within the theories of social processes, three subdivisions can be distinguished (Siegel, 2000).

The first subdivision contains the theories of social learning. According to these theories criminal

behavior is learned in the same way, by using the same learning mechanisms to learn

conventional behavior. The second subdivision contains theories of social control. According to

these theories whether or not a person commits a crime depends on his or her bond with society.

The third subdivision contains theories of social reaction or labeling. According to these theories

delinquent behavior is fostered by the negative reactions of society to one’s behavior.

Within the social learning theories we discuss Sutherland’s (1947) differential association theory,

Sykes’ and Matza’s (1957) neutralizing theory and Burgess’ and Akers’ (1966) differential

reinforcement theory.

According to Sutherland’s (1947) differential association theory, deviant behavior is learned

through several processes of association.21

By saying that criminal behavior is learned,

Sutherland states that young delinquents learn their deviant behavior within a gang. Hence, it can

be derived that it is not the case that a gang attracts individual criminals. Sutherland emphasizes

upon the fact that it depends on the social group with which a youngster interacts, whether he

will perform delinquent behavior or not. In this case he also refers to the social disorganization

21

For example: “When criminal behavior is learned, the learning includes (a) techniques of committing the crime;

(b) the specific direction of motives, drives, rationalizations, and attitudes” (Sutherland, 1947, p. 226).

21

theory (see for example Burgess, 1926; Thrasher, 1963; Shaw & McKay, 1969), but according to

Sutherland it is better to speak of “differential social organization” (Sutherland, 1947, p. 227).

With differential association Sutherland states that “a person becomes delinquent because of an

excess of definitions favorable to violation of law over definitions unfavorable to violation of

law” (Sutherland, 1947, p. 226). This means that it depends on the social structure of a certain

neighborhood whether crime will occur or not. If criminal behavior forms part of the social

structure, then it is more likely that a youngster will find himself confronted with (group)

delinquency within a socially disorganized community.

Sykes’ and Matza’s (1957) theory of neutralization can be seen as an extension of Sutherland’s

(1947) concept of differential association. According to Sykes and Matza (1957), young

delinquents try to justify their behavior, when confronted with an accusation of deviant behavior,

by using techniques of neutralization. Five techniques of neutralization can be distinguished:

denial of responsibility,22

denial of injury,23

denial of the victim,24

condemnation of the

condemners,25

and appeal to higher loyalties.26

Twenty years after Sutherland (1947) introduced his differential association theory; Burgess and

Akers (1966) revised Sutherland’s theory and added the component of social reinforcement to

Sutherland’s processes of association. According to Burgess and Akers (1966), it is not enough

to learn certain behavior within a group. Rather, behavior must be reinforced in order to maintain

the learned behavior. Thus, a person can become delinquent when he finds himself in a context

where “criminal behavior is a function of norms which are discriminative for criminal behavior,

the learning which takes place when such behavior is more highly reinforced than noncriminal

behavior” (Burgess & Akers, 1966, p. 146).

22

Denial of responsibility means that the person does not take any responsibility for his acts and states that he was

led by external forces, which he could not resist, when committing the crime (Sykes & Matza, 1957). 23

Denial of injury means that the person who committed a crime is not convinced of the fact that his act might have

harmful consequences for others (Sykes & Matza, 1957). 24

Denial of the victim means that the person does not agree with the fact that his delinquency entails a victim.

Rather, he perceives his act as one of heroism towards a person or institution which needs to be acted upon (Sykes &

Matza, 1957). 25

Condemnation of the condemners means that while the deviant person does not necessarily deny his wrongness,

he switches the focus of the case to the ones who try to accuse him for his act. In other words, the accused one

accuses his accusers for things they have done wrong (Sykes & Matza, 1957). 26

Appeal to higher loyalties means that the person justifies his act as a sacrifice for someone else. This technique of

neutralization will be used often when a youngster, who is part of a gang, commits a crime, as he will state that he

did it for the group (Sykes & Matza, 1957).

22

Within the social control theories we discuss Reckless’ (1967) containment theory and Hirschi’s

(1969) social bond theory.

According to Hirschi (1969, p. 16) “control theories assume that delinquent acts result when an

individual’s bond to society is weak or broken”. Hirschi distinguishes four elements of the bond:

attachment, commitment, involvement and belief. The first element of the bond, attachment,

means that people are sensitive to someone else’s opinion. This implies that if a person does not

incorporate this feeling of attachment, he will not be inhibited by moral values and norms, and

subsequently this can lead to breaching the rules. The second element of the bond, commitment,

means that people conform to the rule of law because they are afraid of the consequences when

breaking the law. When people are committed to a certain activity (e.g. a job or school), they are

aware of the investment they have put in these activities, which they can lose when committing a

crime. The third element of the bond, involvement, means that people are involved in conformist

activities. People who are involved in conformist activities are just too occupied to even think

about committing a crime. The fourth element of the bond, belief, means that people believe in

the social rules and norms within their society. According to Hirschi (1969), when a person

breaches the rules, it does not necessarily mean that he does not believe in the rules. However, it

is more likely that a person, whose belief in the rules is weakened or who puts his belief aside,

will commit a crime.

Reckless’ (1967) containment theory is based on the concepts of outer and inner containment.

With outer containment, Reckless refers to external factors (e.g. the society, local neighborhood,

family, etc.) which are in the position of exerting power over a young person, in order to keep

him or her on the right track and away from nonconformist behavior. Inner containment, on the

other hand, refers to the internal ability of a person to keep himself on the track of conformist

behavior. The latter will depend on the amount of self-control one has. According to Reckless

(1967), individuals that are both influenced by a high level of outer as well as inner containment,

have lower chances to get involved with delinquent behavior and vice versa. As is the case in

Hirschi’s (1969) social bond theory, also Reckless’ (1967) containment theory suggests that

strong bonds with for example one’s school is of importance; especially if the school is able to

let their students adopt the appropriate rules and norms, which protects them from committing a

crime.

23

Within the social reaction or labeling theories we discuss Tannenbaum’s (1938) dramatization of

evil theory, Lemert’s (1951) theory on primary and secondary deviation and Becker’s (1963)

theory of outsiders.

Tannenbaum (1938) was one of the first criminologists to talk about labeling a certain person,

who performs a certain behavior, as being criminal. In his opinion, some forms of deviant

behavior are being overreacted to (cf. ‘dramatization of the evil’), which stimulates the person to

perform the same acts again, as he already is being perceived as a criminal.

Lemert’s (1951) theory can be regarded as a continuation of Tannenbaum’s theory, as he makes

a distinction between primary and secondary deviation. Also according to Lemert (1951) deviant

behavior (primary deviance) is perceived to be delinquent behavior after processes of

stigmatization by society, which sanctions a person’s deviant behavior and by doing so label the

person as a deviant person. This fosters the process whereby the person starts to perceive himself

as being deviant and reacts upon the intervention of society, by committing more deviant

behavior (secondary deviance).

With the term outsiders Becker refers to “those people who are judged by others to be deviant

and thus to stand outside the circle of ‘normal’ members of the group” (Becker, 1963, p. 246).

According to Becker (1963), a certain group within society takes the power to decide which

behavior is acceptable and which is not acceptable, and subsequently to label certain people as

deviant. Though the rules this group within society imposes to other people are not agreed upon

by the society as a whole.

2.3.4 Theories on risk factors

Before making the step from general theories on youth delinquency and gang membership

towards theories and practices of rehabilitation/reintegration of youth delinquents or gang

members, we discuss some of the risk factors for joining a gang, which Thornberry (1998)

highlights in his review of youth violence and gang membership. Thornberry differentiates

between male and female gang members and distinguishes six levels of risk factors: the level of

the community, family, school, peers, individual, and problematic behavior.

Firstly, on the level of the community, Thornberry (1998) states that male gang members are

more likely to occur in neighborhoods that are not very well integrated. Female gang members,

on the other hand, are more likely to occur within neighborhoods which are integrated, but

24

disorganized and where violence takes place. Also the availability of drugs has an influence on

joining a gang at a young age (between seven and seventeen years old).

Secondly, at the level of the family, Thornberry (1998) argues that boys who do not live with

both parents, and grow up without much supervision or parents, who are attached to him, have an

increased chance to become a gang member. Equally so, girls, who grow up in a family that is

not really involved with their daughter, have higher chances to become a gang member. Some

other family factors can be a stimulant for youngsters to join a gang at an early age. For example:

‘extreme economic deprivation’, ‘parent proviolent attitudes’, ‘family instability’, ‘family

management problems’, and ‘sibling antisocial behavior’. On the other hand youngsters who are

attached to their mother, according to Thornberry (1998), are less likely to join a gang at a young

age.

Thirdly, at the level of the school, Thornberry (1998) states that boys and girls are less likely to

join a gang when they are committed to school, attached to their teachers, and when their parents

and they have expectations for their school. Children, who demonstrate antisocial behavior at

school, achieve low results and have little to no educational aspiration, are more likely to join a

gang at a young age.

Fourthly, at the level of the peer group, Thornberry (1998) argues that factors as association with

delinquent peers and unsupervised time spent with friends have an influence on male gang

membership. Children who are involved with “bad” peers and who are not attached to

conventional peers are more likely to join a gang at an early age.

Fifthly, at the level of the individual, Thornberry (1998) discusses that boys have higher odds to

become a gang member when they have experienced negative life events, a negative self-esteem

and depression. Boys as well as girls who share positive values about drugs and have access to

drugs are more likely to get involved with a gang. Other individual factors, such as having weak

social competences, being a boy or being hyperactive, increase the probability to join a gang.

Lastly, at the level of problematic behavior, Thornberry (1998) says that delinquent boys and

girls, and boys who have committed a violent crime before or used drugs are more likely to join

a gang. Other factors regarding problematic behavior, like having first time sexual relationships

at a young age and drinking, influence joining a gang at a young age.

25

The previous section discusses several criminological theories related to gangs and gang

membership in general. The next section focuses more specifically on theories of rehabilitation

and reintegration of gang members.

2.4 Rehabilitation – reintegration

This section focuses on theories of rehabilitation and reintegration of gang members in general

and also related to the specific context of Honduras. To conclude, we discuss some good and bad

practices of rehabilitation and reintegration interventions in Honduras. In order to have a good

understanding of the difference between prevention, rehabilitation and social reintegration, we

first of all define the different concepts.

2.4.1 Definitions

In this dissertation we use the definitions of the concepts prevention, rehabilitation and

reintegration, as defined by the Law for prevention, rehabilitation and social reintegration of

members of maras and pandillas.27

Prevention is defined by the aforementioned law as “actions in the family, community and in

society as a whole, seeking for spaces of socialization and participation, as well as early

identification and the reversal of attitudes and risk factors that can lead to gang membership, as

well as interventions that reduce the consequences of gang membership, and especially criminal

behavior”.28

Rehabilitation is defined by the law as “educational, habilitation, and therapeutic action,

directed at members of maras and pandillas who benefit from programs that aim to change

attitudes, de practice of values and skills development”.29

27

Ley Octubre 31 2001 para la prevención, rehabilitación y reinserción social de personas integrantes de maras o

pandillas. 28

“las acciones desarrolladas en la familia, comunidad y en toda la sociedad, en procura de espacios de

socialización y participación, así como la identificación temprana y reversión de actitudes y factores de riesgo que

induzcan a la agrupación en pandillas o maras, al igual que las intervenciones que permitan reducir las

consecuencias de dicha pertenencia, en especial las conductas delictivas.” (Art. 2, Ley Octubre 31 2001 para la

prevención, rehabilitación y reinserción social de personas integrantes de maras o pandillas). 29

“acción educativa, habilitatoria y terapéutica, dirigida a las personas, pandillas o maras que sean beneficiados

por programas que tengan por objetivo el cambio de actitudes, práctica de valores y desarrollo de

aptitudes”(Idem).

26

Social reintegration is defined by the law as “the process by which the persons who are in

rehabilitation or who are rehabilitated start or retake their study activities, job, recreation,

construction of family relationships and other networks, for their personal and social

development, in conditions which are safe and with full respect for their rights”.30

2.4.2 Criminological theories of rehabilitation/reintegration

In this section we discuss the reintegration of gang members within society, prevention and

treatment measurements in urban areas, prevention and intervention programs, and the ‘What

Works’-principles.

2.4.2.1 Giving the gang a place in the community

Thrasher (1963) does not focus on eliminating the gang and pushing them to the borders of our

society. Rather, he argues that the gang must be given a place in their community. According to

Thrasher, two institutions need to take care of this: those who advocate for the interests of the

youngsters in the gang, and those who represent the law.

Firstly, with regard of the legal powers in our society, Thrasher (1963) considers that there is no

sympathy for the situation of young gang members. Policemen have the feeling they need to

suppress the gang and address them in a harsh way, without providing any suitable leisure

alternative.

Secondly, Thrasher (1963) argues that most treatment programs were not successful, because

they isolated the boy from his gang and did not take the group factor into account. The

delinquent’s group plays an important role in the individual’s life when he is constructing his

own identity. Thrasher argues that, when developing a program for the treatment of gang

members, attention must go to all groups in society to which the boy is affiliated. In other words,

attention must be given to “not merely the gang alone, but the family, the neighborhood, the

school, the church, the occupational group, and so on” (Thrasher, 1963, p. 345). It is of

importance to adapt the program to the person concerned; i.e. the role the youngster had in his

gang needs to be replaced by another meaningful role within society.

30

“proceso por el cual las personas en rehabilitación o rehabilitadas inician o retoman actividades de estudio,

trabajo, recreación, construcción de redes de relaciones familiares y otras para su desarrollo personal y social, en

condiciones de seguridad y respeto pleno a sus derechos” (Idem).

27

Thirdly, according to Thrasher (1963) there are only two ways for a gang member to be

reintegrated into society: complete removal from the gang and the associated social structure, or

reformation of the gang. According to Thrasher’s (1963) investigation, the first option has shown

negative results. One of the methods to withdraw a gang member from his gang is to isolate him

in an institution outside his community, where he will receive a reeducation program. Although

this method might lead to deterrence in the first place, it is very unlikely that the boy will

continue his new behavior, which he learned in an artificial setup, when going back to his

community and friends. In fact, the delinquent that goes back to his community, after following

an institutional program, might acquire an even higher status in the gang, as the boy now has a

proven criminal history. The same applies for moving the family of a delinquent boy to another

neighborhood, as most of these families do not have the money to improve their living

circumstances and thus will end up in similar areas. Thrasher concludes by saying that “sending

a gang boy away to an institution turns out to be little more than one method of evading the real

problem – that of adjusting him in his actual social world” (Thrasher, 1963, p. 350). The second

option, reformation of the gang, has more potential. The typical example to which Thrasher

refers is turning a gang into a Boy Scouts. The roles the boys had in the gang are subsequently

turned into taking positive responsibility for their community (e.g. instead of terrorizing a

playground, making them responsible for the safety of the playground). Thrasher concludes by

saying that there is a “need to develop a program into which the activities of the gang and its

members can be incorporated and through which they can be given significance in a larger plan

of life” (Thrasher, 1963, p. 359).

2.4.2.2 Prevention and treatment in urban areas

Shaw and McKay (1969) draw some conclusions from their research on juvenile delinquency in

Chicago. Firstly, they state that no major decrease of criminality in certain areas will happen, as

long as the socio-economic lifestyles of the people who live in these areas do not change.

Secondly, instead of individual treatments, Shaw and McKay opt for large-scale community-

based treatment projects. In order to raise solidarity, responsibility and awareness of the

problems in the community, the projects need to be organized and led by local citizens and not

by external people. These local citizens include “members of churches, societies, labor unions,

trades and professions, business groups, athletic clubs, and a miscellany of other groups and

28

organizations” (Shaw & McKay, 1969, p. 323). These types of programs also try to work with

the local instances, like churches, schools, sport and recreation centers, and other social groups.

Along with these groups the community workers organize activities, excursions, boy scouts,

creative workshops, etc. Delinquency, from this perspective, must be seen as a problem of the

community as a whole and not as an individual problem of the delinquent boys themselves.

With the aim of reducing juvenile delinquency at the level of the neighborhood, by improving

people’s life within their community, Clifford Shaw founded the Chicago Area Project (CAP) in

1934. In accordance with Shaw’s and McKay’s (1969) research, the CAP is based on the

cooperation of local residents, as they are perceived to be most aware of the problems and

potential solutions within their community. The CAP aims at reducing delinquency in urban

neighborhoods in Chicago, by basing their projects on three principles: Community Organizing,31

Direct Services,32

and Advocacy.33

According to the organizers of the CAP, the project has

shown to be effective in reducing juvenile delinquency and its principles are used as an example

for other community projects (CAP, n.d.). Kobrin (1959) agrees the CAP raised more

responsibility among residents, living in areas affected by delinquency, who are know organizing

themselves to address the welfare of the youngsters within their neighborhood. The CAP was

also the first US program which was able to get in contact with individual gang members and

guide them towards more positive norms and values. In addition it states that cooperation with

the family and peers is an important asset.

Shaw’s and McKay’s research and the Chicago Area Project focus on individual delinquents as

well as on delinquents within a gang, whereby they also take into account the community

context.

2.4.2.3 Prevention and intervention programs

According to Howell’s (1998) meta-analysis of 21 youth gang prevention and intervention

programs, following aspects seemed to be necessary to achieve positive results. Firstly, most

31

“Community Organizing involves identifying local leaders and supporting their efforts in mobilizing residents to

take responsibility for guiding young people. Working together, community leaders, residents, and youth prioritize

neighborhood-specific issues, seek effective solutions, and identify available resources to address them” (CAP,

n.d.). 32

“Direct Services occur through CAP’s network of more than 40 affiliates offering educational, cultural, and

recreational programs” (CAP, n.d.). 33

“CAP Advocates with neighborhood groups on behalf of their youth for improvements in schools, juvenile court

systems, and employment opportunities” (CAP, n.d.).

29

effective are multimodal programs which incorporate “prevention, social intervention, treatment,

suppression, and community mobilization approaches” (Howell, 1998, p. 311). All these

methods need to interact with each other in a holistic setting, which includes coordination and

follow-up. Secondly, in order to engage the community in the process of gang reintegration, the

following actors need to be involved: “police, prosecutors, judges, probation and parole

officers, corrections officers, schools, employers, community-based agencies, and a range of

grassroots organizations” (Howell, 1998, p. 311). Thirdly, in order to reduce gang related

violence and delinquency, the focus needs to go to social development, risk- and protective

factors, and the needs of the youngster.

One example of youth gang violence prevention and intervention is the G.R.E.A.T. program.

Gang Resistance Education and Training (G.R.E.A.T.) is an American school-based program

which aims to prevent young middle school students, aged 11-14 years old, from joining a gang.

The G.R.E.A.T. program targets a young age in order to create awareness of the negative aspects

of gang life, before children have reached the age to be able to participate in a gang. The

program organizes classes and workshops, teaching the students, via discussions and role

playing, how to stay out of gangsterism,34

and to be a responsible citizen (Reed & Decker, 2002).

According to Reed and Decker (2002), in the short run (after a one year follow-up) the program

resulted in less delinquency, more positive attitudes regarding the police, one’s self-esteem,

one’s relationship with their family and school. Equally so, in the long run (after a four year

follow-up) the program achieved the same results. It also encouraged youngsters to be involved

with friends in positive leisure activities and to show their disapproval regarding gangs. After

reviewing the G.R.E.A.T. program, the G.R.E.A.T. Review Workgroup listed three goals and

five objectives for the program. The goals of the program are “to reduce gang membership, to

prevent violence and criminal activity, and to develop positive relationships with law

enforcement” (p. 158). The objectives of the program are “to improve social competency skills35

[…], to foster empathy for victims, to encourage positive social affiliations, to alter perceptions

about gangs, and to increase social responsibility” (Reed & Decker, 2002, p. 158-159).

34

“the culture of belonging to organized gangs of criminals, especially involving violence”, retrieved April 8, 2014,

from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/gangsterism 35

“emotional control; stress management; conflict resolution; communication and listening; and decisionmaking,

problem-solving, and goal-setting skills” (Reed, & Decker, 2002, p. 158).

30

2.4.2.4 What Works

This section discusses the ‘What Works’-principles, followed by the principles of treatment

effectiveness.

What Works principles

According to a meta-analysis of Dowden and Andrews (1999), four principles need to be taken

into account when targeting juvenile delinquency: the principle of human service, the risk

principle, the need principle and the general responsivity principle. The risk principle entails that

the program or treatment should be adapted to the level of risk (low, medium, high) to which a

young delinquent is likely to relapse, i.e. the risk of recidivism. The principle of general

responsivity means that, in order to reduce the recidivism rate, the program must be “behavioral

or [use] several treatment methods such as modeling, graduated practice, role-playing and

several other skill-building techniques” (Dowden & Andrews, 1999, p. 22). The need principle

explains that programs must focus on criminogenic and not on noncriminogenic needs.

According to Andrews and Bonta (2006, p. 281) “Criminogenic needs are a subset of an

offender’s risk level. They are dynamic risk factors that, when changed, are associated with

changes in the probability of recidivism. Noncriminogenic needs are also dynamic and

changeable, but they are weakly associated with recidivism”. The most effective criminogenic

needs are: “family supervision, and family affection, barriers to treatment, self-control, anger

/antisocial feelings, vocational skills + job, and academic” (Dowden & Andrews, 1999, p. 23).

Other criminogenic needs with a positive effect on reducing recidivism rates are: “pro-social

model, antisocial attitudes, [reducing] antisocial peers, vocational skills, relapse prevention,

and substance abuse treatment” (Dowden & Andrews, 1999, p. 23). For more principles of

effective treatment, a table with an overview of Andrews’ “principles of effective prevention and

correctional treatment through direct service” (Andrews, 1995, p. 42) can be found in annex

(see Annex 1).

As mentioned above, according to Dowden and Andrews (1999), programs targeting

noncriminogenic needs have a negative impact on helping youngsters to deter from

31

delinquency.36

Equally so, interventions based on criminal sanctioning do not have positive

results regarding the deterring process of young delinquents.

Treatment effectiveness

While some researchers focus on the group and community aspects of delinquency, Lipsey

(1995) focuses on the individual aspects of youth delinquency. Lipsey (1995) reviewed 400

studies to investigate the effectiveness of treatment with young delinquents between 12 and 21

years old. According to Lipsey (1995), six aspects are effective regarding the treatment of young

delinquents. Firstly, youngsters with a delinquent background who get a treatment are less likely

to reoffend. Secondly, psychological treatment, focusing on for example “attitudes, self-esteem,

MMPI or other clinical scales” (Lipsey, 1995, p. 68), is effective in reducing youth delinquency.

Thirdly, interpersonal adjustment treatment, focusing on for example “peer or family

relationships, interpersonal skills” (Lipsey, 1995, p. 68), is effective in reducing the recidivism

rate. Fourthly, young delinquents who received a school participation treatment, focusing on for

example “attendance, drop-out” (Lipsey, 1995, p. 68), are less likely to reoffend. Fifthly,

academic performance treatment, focusing on for example “grades, achievement tests” (Lipsey,

1995, p. 68) facilitates the reduction of youth delinquency. Sixthly, young delinquents, who

received a vocational accomplishment treatment, focusing on for example “job status, wages”

(Lipsey, 1995, p. 68), are less likely to reoffend. Lipsey (1995) encountered differential effects

for three other treatment aspects. Firstly, according to Lipsey (1995), treatment of high risk

young offenders shows greater impact on recidivism rates, than treatment of low risk youth.

These findings are comparable to what Dowden and Andrews (1999) state about keeping in mind

the risk principle when applying a certain treatment. Secondly, following extra-judicial treatment

forms seemed to be most effective in reducing juvenile delinquency: “skill oriented, multimodal,

behavioral, group counseling, casework, family counseling, advocacy, [and] other counseling”

(Lipsey, 1995, p. 75). Thirdly, although Lipsey (1995) also revised the influence of the

involvement of the researcher and the duration of the program on recidivism rates, these factors

were far less important than the type of treatment when receives.

36

For example, programs which focus on “fear of official punishment, increase cohesive antisocial peers, other

family interventions, target self-esteem, vague emotional/personal problems, respect antisocial thinking, physical

activity, and increase conventional ambition” (Dowden & Andrews, 1999, p. 23).

32

Lipsey (1995) additionaly identified some negative treatment measurements regarding non-

juvenile justice programs. “School class/tutor [and] individual counseling” (Lipsey, 1995, p. 75)

prove no effects and “employment/vocational” (Lipsey, 1995, p. 75) treatments resulted in

negative effects on juvenile recidivism rates. Shaw and McKay (1969) agree with Lipsey (1995)

that individual methods of treatment are not likely to achieve positive results regarding the

reintegration of young gang members.

Lipsey (1995) concludes by giving three points of focus when it comes down to treatment

programs for juvenile delinquents:

1. Focus treatment around behavioral, training or skills issues appropriate to the clientele

using concrete, structured approaches as much as possible (Lipsey, 1995, p. 77).

2. Monitor, supervise and implement the treatment well (Lipsey, 1995, p. 78).

3. Provide a sufficient amount of service, preferably 100 or more total contact hours,

delivered at two or more contacts per week over a period of 26 weeks or more (Lipsey,

1995, p. 78).

According to Lipsey’s and Wilson’s (1998) joint research synthesis of effective and non-

effective interventions with juvenile offenders, most effective methods proved to be “individual

counseling, interpersonal skills, and behavioral programs” (Lipsey & Wilson, 1998, p. 332).

Also effective, but less convincing, are “multiple services, and restitution - probation/parole”

(Lipsey & Wilson, 1998, p. 332). Five methods seemed to have mixed, although positive, results:

“employment related, academic programs, advocacy/casework, family counseling, and group

counseling” (Lipsey & Wilson, 1998, p. 332).

Lipsey and Wilson (1998) also came across five methods which had little to no effect on the

treatment of non-institutionalized offenders. Those methods are: “reduced caseload

(probation/parole), wilderness/challenge, early release (probation/parole), deterrence

programs, and vocational programs” (Lipsey & Wilson, 1998, p. 332).

2.4.3 Rehabilitation/reintegration in Honduras

This section focuses on aspects of rehabilitation and reintegration in Honduras. We first discuss

reasons to leave the gang, followed by some intervention programs in Honduras.

33

2.4.3.1 Reasons to leave the gang

According to Merino (2004), it is not easy for a marero to leave the gang. First of all, a gang is

never eager in letting one of its members go. Secondly, although society wants to fight crime,

they do not warmly welcome ex-criminals, and ex-mareros will often be confronted with

discrimination. This section discusses the reasons (ex-) gang members give for leaving their gang

and the difficulties they experience when doing so.

“Those who leave the gang, but not for a child, a marriage, or for God, is a betrayer and the

betrayer will be punished” (Merino, 2004, p. 126).37

According to Merino (2004), there are two

main reasons for mareros to (get permission to) leave their gang: converting to the Evangelism

or starting a family. By getting married or having a child, the marero is obliged to start working

in order to earn money and to maintain his family, which means he has less time to spend with

the gang, which can ensure that he will eventually leave the gang. Rodriguez Bolaños and

Sanabria León (2007) state that a high percentage of Central American gang members perceive a

job or education as an opportunity to leave their gang. Also according to Aplícano Cubero (2012)

a lot of youngsters keep up the hope that one day they can pick up their studies again and thus

will be able to meet their goals in a legal way, which not include violence or crime.

Despite the stereotypical notion, that it is impossible to leave a gang, more than half of the

(active) gang members indicate that there is nothing that keeps them from leaving the gang.

Nevertheless, they are aware of the possible reprisals of the gang, which may include

assassination (Rodríguez Bolaños & Sanabria León, 2007). The possibility of reprisals against

themselves or their family is one of the main preoccupations of incarcerated gang members,

along with the visibility of their tattoos and not finding a job (PNPRRS, 2011).

Given this information, it becomes evident that, for a gang member, it is not easy to leave the

gang. Not every marero is willing to leave his gang, because it would include giving up the

social bonds with the other gang members. When leaving the gang, ex-pandilleros place

themselves in a vulnerable position, as society is not eager to welcome them, in conjunction with

the fact that there is an insufficient amount of available rehabilitation projects (Rodríguez

Bolaños & Sanabria León, 2007).

37

“El que deja la mara, a no ser por un hijo, por casarse, o por Dios, es un traidor y al traidor se le

castiga”(Merino, 2004, p. 126).

34

According to the research of Rodríguez Bolaños and Sanbria León (2007) almost half of the ex-

gang members declare that leaving their gang was their own decision. Also, almost 50% of the

gang members they have interviewed say they have been offered an alternative to live their life

and to leave the gang. Those alternatives were mostly given by their families and/or friends, and

by religious institutions. Only a minority of the gang members has been offered an alternative by

NGO’s and none of them mention being helped by governmental programs.

The next section will give an overview of alternatives for mareros, offered by the government as

well as by non-governmental institutions.

2.4.3.2 Intervention programs in Honduras

This section outlines governmental as well as non-governmental interventions in Honduras.

Governmental interventions

There is a great difference in rehabilitation initiatives created by the government and those

created by NGO’s. According to Merino (2004) the government focuses mainly on penitential

rehabilitation forms. This section discusses the governmental interventions regarding the

reintegration of maras and pandillas.

Rodríguez Bolaños and Sanabria León (2007) state that although a lot of gang members are

willing to leave the gang, there is a lack of well-functioning alternatives to support their process

of desistance. The society discriminates (ex-) gang members and does not offer any opportunities

to change their lives. Also according to the PNPRRS (2011), young mareros who are locked up

in prison often do not receive help from the state, in order to be able to rehabilitate and

reintegrate themselves in society. They state that gang members ask for specific help from the

state, which includes work opportunities or support for the development of a microenterprise,

and rehabilitation programs.

Besides the reformation of the article 332 of the Penal Code of Honduras (the Ley Mano Dura),

the politicians failed to address the problem of maras and pandillas. According to the PNPRRS

(2011) and Reisman (2006) the state should strategize and focus on prevention, rehabilitation and

reintegration, even though this could generate a lot of expenses. Unfortunately, the opposite of

35

what they aimed happened. Instead of focusing on alternative sanctions, such as community

work, the justice system aimed at punishment and imprisonment. Only a small amount of the

governmental budget went to prevention, rehabilitation and reinsertion. This small budget goes

to the implementation of the National Program for Prevention, Rehabilitation and Reintegration

(PNPRRS). The main goal of this program is to coordinate and support the implementation of

programs, projects and other activities regarding this topic. By focusing on prevention, the

PNPRRS aims to reduce the risk factors that foster youngsters to join a gang. Despite these good

intentions, the PNPRRS argue they do not have sufficient resources to implement their activities

in order to achieve these goals (PNPRRS, 2011).38

Other governmental institutions include: La Unidad de Muerte de Menores (The Unity of the

Death of Minors), which aim to clarify the extrajudicial executions; El Instituto Nacional de la

Juventud (The National Institute of Youth); the Community Police, which aim to educate and

work preventively via sensibilisation programs. In 2011, there were 110 community programs in

different cities of Honduras. The aim of these community programs is to promote local politics in

favor of children and youngsters. They try to do this by organizing activities on different

problematic themes that affect children and youngsters (e.g. HIV/AIDS infections). These

programs collaborate with the other, similar, organizations in their community (PNPRRS, 2011).

Non-governmental interventions

According to the PNPRRS (2011), non-governmental institutions that work in the field of

rehabilitation and reintegration of maras and pandillas, lack sufficient resources to implement

their projects. Nevertheless, there are several non-governmental institutions in Honduras,

working in the field of prevention, rehabilitation and reintegration of maras and pandillas:

“Proyecto Victoria, Hogares Crea, Sociedad Amigos de Los Niños, Remar Internacional

Honduras, Teen Challenge, Orphan Helpers, JHA-JA, Evangelismo Explosivo, Generación X,

Fundación Unidos Por la Vida, Casa Alianza, Manos Extendidas, Free The Oppresed,

Ministerio Jehová Nissi, Misioneras Scalabrinianas, CPTRT” (PNPRRS, 2011, p. 84). Other

NGO actions consist of: “Asociación Cristiana de Jóvenes, Arte y Acción, Libre Expresión,

38

By way of comparison (and as mentioned earlier in this dissertation): as much as 4137.1 million Lempira (almost

200 million dollar), or 4.6% of the central administration expenses of Honduras, goes to security (i.d. the police

forces). While only 6.4 million Lempira (or 300 thousand dollar) is spent on the national program of prevention,

rehabilitation and social reintegration (Presupuesto Ciudadano, 2013).

36

COFADEH, Cámara Junior de Honduras, Red COIPRODEN, Pastoral Social Juvenil”

(PNPRRS, 2011, p. 84) and churches that guide youngsters in their process of development.

According to Merino (2004), both the Christian and Catholic Church have an important role in

the rehabilitation of gang members. The main difference between Christians and Catholics is that

Christians distinguish between the person as a human being in this world and his religious

relationship with God (which is more transcendental). Catholics, on the contrary, do not make

this distinction. It is not surprising that the Christian Church commits itself to the rehabilitation

of alcohol and drug addicts, and mareros, because that is one of the goals of Christians. When a

marero wants to accept the Gospel, and thus submit himself to God in order to be saved, he must

leave the gang, entailing no more fornication, drugs, alcohol, theft and other delinquent acts. The

Christian Churches provide food and a place to stay for people who are in their process of

change, where they can find support and assistance from other companions. This sense of

belonging to a group is something very important for (ex-) mareros, which they previously could

find in the gang, but now in a more socially acceptable context. According to the Gospel, tattoos

do not have to be removed, because they are prove of the growth of a person, from gang member

to a religious Christian. Contrary to the Christian Church, the main (and often only) support from

the Catholic Church to mareros is the removal of their tattoos.

2.4.4 Good and bad practices of rehabilitation/reintegration interventions

This section highlights some good and bad practices of rehabilitation and/or reintegration

interventions in Honduras.

2.4.4.1 Good practices of rehabilitation/reintegration interventions

According to Merino (2004), repression is not an effective form to reduce gang violence. It is

more important to search for the main cause of gang violence, rather than merely looking at the

outcome. When there is a clear view of the reasons and circumstances that provoke the violence,

it is easier to tackle the problem at its roots. Each and every form of rehabilitation needs to focus

on the person as such and not on his behavior.

Some good practices can facilitate the reintegration process. According to Merino (2004) it is

important to talk and listen to what (ex-) gang members have to say and thus to respond to their

37

specific needs. This is in line with what Andrews and Bonta (2006) mean with the need and

responsivity principle. Merino (2004) also agrees with the principle that rehabilitation needs to

take place in the environment of the (ex-) gang member, where he feels safe and secure, which is

in accordance with Andrews’ and Bonta’s (2010) community-based principle.

2.4.4.2 Bad practices of rehabilitation/reintegration interventions

Though the implementation of the Mano Dura law cannot be seen as a bad practice as such,

Rodriguez Bolaños and Sanabria León (2007) argue that the Honduran policy makers, though

aiming at the decrease of crime and assassination in their country, achieved the opposite. In 2003

(when the Mano Dura law was implemented) and 2004, the homicide rate was at one of its

lowest points in history with less than 40 assassinations per 100.000 inhabitants. Deploringly,

between 2005 and 2010 the murder rate increased to more than 80 (per 100.000) people being

killed and currently no less than 90 per 100.000 citizens are assassinated every year in Honduras

(UNODC, 2011; UNODC, 2013). According to Afonso, Cardoso, Santos, Roque and Moura

(2012), crime rates did not drop in Honduras and Central America as a whole, due to the

common lack of prevention and reintegration programs. They also state there was no

improvement of the socio-economic circumstances in which many of the young gang members

have to live.

Although the aim of imprisonment should be the rehabilitation of offenders, Honduran prisons

have a lot of shortcomings. Besides the overcrowded prison cells and violence between

prisoners, there are very few formal education opportunities, let alone other forms of trainings or

rehabilitation programs (PNPRRS, 2011; Reisman, 2006). If the government thought they could

increase the gang’s power, they made a mistake. According to Cruz (2010), gangs became better

organized; strategies were discussed, and the orders and instructions were commanded from

inside the prisons, where a lot of gang leaders were locked up together.

The previous chapters discuss the phenomenon of maras and pandillas in Honduras and

criminological theories of gangs and the rehabilitation/reintegration of gang members. Based on

this literature review we set up our conceptual framework and research design, which is

discussed in the next chapter.

38

3. Methodology

This chapter contains three sections. The first section clarifies the definition of the central

problem. The second section outlines the conceptual framework. The third section discusses the

research design.

3.1 Definition of the central problem

In this section we discuss the research topic and objectives, as well as the description of the

research questions.

3.1.1 Research topic and objectives

The topic of this dissertation is the reintegration process of young gang members (maras y

pandillas) in Honduras. This topic is researched by investigating the intervention methods used

in programs to reintegrate gang members.

According to the PNPRRS (2011), currently, notwithstanding the fact that the phenomenon of

maras and pandillas in Central America has already existed for more than 20 years, merely

descriptive research, based upon secondary information, has been done thus far. The severity of

the problem urges for more research, including primary data. Also Wood and Alleyne believe

that the problems caused by street gangs needs to be taken seriously and is worthwhile to be

researched. They state that “our knowledge on gangs is still limited and rather muddy” (Wood &

Alleyne, 2010, pp. 100-101).

In May 2013 the two biggest gangs in Honduras, Mara Salvatrucha and Barrio 18 announced a

truce stating they would cease all violence. The aformentioned truce was facilitated by Bishop

Romulo Emiliani (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-22694989). Although not all

violence stopped in Honduras and it is not sure if we can speak of a truce between the two gangs,

it can be of interest to investigate which intervention methods are effective in helping gang

members to reintegrate into society.

3.1.2 Description of the research questions

There is one main question and two sub-questions. The two sub-questions aim to formulate a

clear answer to the main question.

39

Main question:

How can the reintegration of young gang members into society best be facilitated?

Sub-questions:

1. For which reasons can young gang members leave a gang?

2. Which intervention methods can facilitate young gang members in their process of

leaving the gang and reintegrate in society?

In order to be able to answer the main question, two aspects will be considered. Firstly, we need

to know how a young gang member can be motivated to leave his gang. This means, we need to

seek which triggers, internally and externally, can convince him to leave the gang. Secondly,

when a gang member is willing to leave his gang, we need to know what the intervention

methods of reintegration programs offer the youngster. The latter sub-question will include both

governmental and nongovernmental reintegration programs.

3.2 Conceptual framework

Deriving from the findings in the literature review and based upon the research questions, two

conceptual frameworks can be drawn. The first one gives an overview of the whole research

process, while the second one focuses specifically on the intervention methods of the

reintegration process.

Figure 1: Conceptual framework

40

The aim of the first conceptual framework (see figure 1) is to give an oversight of the concepts

that are used to answer the research questions. The relations between the concepts, shown by the

arrows, do not indicate a causal link; it does show descriptive or theory-driven links. The concept

‘gang membership’ is both a dependent and an independent variable. On the one hand, whether

or not a youngster becomes involved in a gang depends on the specific context, which is

indicated with ‘reasons to join a gang’. On the other hand, being in a gang has an influence on

whether or not a youngster is able to leave the gang (‘reasons to leave the gang’) and can get

enrolled in a reintegration program (‘intervention methods’). The latter two concepts are

coupled, as intervention methods can only be applied to those who are willing to leave their

gang.

The concepts ‘reasons to join a gang’ and ‘gang membership’ are not directly derived from the

research questions, but are necessary to understand the investigation on reintegration processes.

In order to comprehend how and for which reasons young gang members can leave the gang, we

should be familiar with the reasons why youngsters join a gang in the first place. The concept

‘reasons to leave a gang’ is derived from the first sub-question (“For which reasons can young

gang members leave the gang?”). The concept ‘intervention methods’ is subsequently derived

from the second research question (“With which intervention methods can the reintegration of

young gang members be facilitated?”).

The second conceptual framework is a matrix (see table 1), which focuses more on the

intervention methods of reintegration.

Intervention methods Respondents that incorporate these practices + the

methods they use

1. Community-based

1.1 Local community

/neighborhood

1.2 Family

1.3 Education

41

1.4 Religion and church

2. Psychological treatment

3. Medical treatment

4. Vocational training

4.1 Interpersonal skills

4.2 Employment

5 General responsivity

(multimodality)

6 Holistic approach

Table 1: Conceptual framework - matrix

The first column of figure 2 gives an overview of six intervention methods which are derived

from the literature. The second column is to be filled in when analyzing the data. This column

will display the organizations that incorporate these aspects in their programs and practical

examples from how the organization implements the given methods in their programs.

3.3 Research design

The section of the research design consists of five parts. Firstly, the method proposed for the

research will be explained. Secondly, the sampling process, and within it the different phases,

will be elucidated. Thirdly, the data collection methods and instruments will be discussed.

Fourthly, the way in which the data will be analyzed will be explained. Fifthly, the strategies to

guarantee the quality of the research will be discussed.

3.3.1 Research method

In order to investigate the reintegration process of young gang members into society, a

qualitative research method seems to be appropriate for several reasons. Firstly, the purpose of

the research is to get a profound understanding of – once a person got involved as a gang

member – the reasons way and how young gang members can leave a gang. It will be

investigated how gang members experience this process and thus their life histories matter

(Silverman, 2013). Secondly, qualitative data can be “inherently more ‘interesting’ than

numbers” (Silverman, 2013, p. 12). This is definitely the case for this research, as it is the aim to

42

acquire in-depth information from the respondents who will be interviewed with respect to their

experiences with young gang members who want to reintegrate into society. Thirdly, choosing

for a qualitative research design includes a practical matter too (Silverman, 2013). There are no

lists available with names and details of all gang members in Honduras. When using a qualitative

design, we are able to interview stakeholders and thus get access to the field via personal

contacts.

3.3.2 Sampling process

This part discusses the research population, the research sample, the sampling techniques that

will be used, and how access to the sources of information will be guaranteed.

3.3.2.1 Research population

The research population exists out of a larger entity of individuals with specific characteristics.

The research cannot include the whole research population and the limits, along with the criteria

of inclusion, will be discussed (Mortelmans, 2010).

Firstly, only organizations, institutions or individuals located in Honduras can be selected for the

research. Secondly, both ambulant and residential programs will be investigated. Thirdly, it must

be stated clearly that gang members as such will not be interviewed directly, due to safety

reasons. The information will thus be gathered via secondary instances (people working with the

youngsters). Fourthly, governmental as well as non-governmental organizations or individual

actors will be included in the research population.

3.3.2.2 Research sample

In order to make an investigation of the research population possible (without including the

entire population), 10-15 sample units are selected in Honduras. The research units are not

elected from an existing sampling frame (Mortelmans, 2010), but they are chosen based upon

inclusion criteria (cf. 3.3.2.1). Attention will be paid to all categories of the research population.

It is in the interest of the research to differentiate between programs created by governmental and

non-governmental organizations. The latter is often more critical towards the government

policies and can give a specific meaning to its program. While governmental organizations, on

the other hand, are interesting to get a view on what the government’s focus is. Besides these

43

organizations, professors and academics that setup, monitor or evaluate certain programs are also

interviewed to get insight in the academic approach of dealing with youth gang membership.

3.3.2.3 Sampling techniques

For this qualitative research, several sampling techniques are used. Firstly, the technique of non-

random, purposive sampling is applied. Drawing a purposive non-random sample means that

especially information rich cases are elected for the research sample, i.e. respondents who can

give information on reintegration processes of young gang members. Secondly, in order to get an

insight in the different visions of methods of reintegration processes of gang members, we

strived for heterogeneity or maximum variation between the sample units. This means that a

balance is sought between information on programs implemented by governmental and non-

governmental organizations, complemented with the expertise of academics. Thirdly, because

the research team is not very familiar with the research field of youth gangs in Honduras, and for

the sake of including the right people in the research sample, the method of snowball sampling is

also used during the data gathering (Mortelmans, 2010).

3.3.2.4 Access to sources of information

The units are elected via contacts of both Prof. Parmentier and dr. Van Wijnendaele. Before

heading to the field, internet research has been done to contact research units via e-mail and

telephone. Most of the Honduran respondents were contacted via the University Institute of

Democracy, Peace and Security (Instituto Universitario de Democracía, Paz y Seguridad;

IUDPAS), in Tegucigalpa. The team of IUDPAS can be seen as ‘key figures’ that can facilitate

access to the field of research (Vander Laenen, 2010). The IUDPAS team has a lot of contacts all

over the capital and the rest of the country.

3.3.3 Data collection

For this research, the method of qualitative interviews is used, in order to “’get inside the heads’

of particular groups of people and to tell things from their ‘point of view’” (Silverman, 2013, p.

201). This means that respondents are free to discuss their findings on the intervention methods

of their own projects as well as methods used in other projects. In total 26 interviews were taken

in the five Central American countries, but only the 14 interviews conducted in Honduras were

44

used, as this is the focus of the study. In order to be able to analyze the interviews, they were

recorded and transcribed (Silverman, 2013).

As mentioned above, the information was gathered by interviewing the sample units via semi-

structured interviews, using a topic list (see Annex 1 and 2) to guide the interview (Beyens &

Tournel, 2010; Silverman, 2013). The topic list consists of six parts. The first part is the ‘general’

part, where general questions are asked; for example: “how is your work related to gang

members?” This question is used as a step towards some more specific questions and to get an

insight in the functioning of the organization or to get insight in the work of the respondent. The

second part is the ‘prevention’ part. Organizations who work with young gang members, who

want to reintegrate in society, often simultaneously work preventively. It is thus in the interest of

the research to find out if a certain organization also pays attention to the prevention of gang

membership in its programs. The third part is the ‘life-of-a-gang-member’ part. The aim of this

part is to get an insight in how and why youngsters get involved in gangs. This information can

help to get an insight in the process (and difficulties) of leaving the gang. This brings us to the

fourth part or the ‘leaving-the-gang’ part. The questions of this part ask about the motivation of

youngsters who want to leave the gang and which obstacles they (and those who don’t leave the

gang) meet on their way out. After these questions, the interview focuses on the reintegration

process of gang members. This is the fifth part, which investigates intervention methods (good

and bad practices) of reintegration programs or actions. It also includes a question about the

importance of religion in the reintegration process, as Honduras is a very religious country. Then

the sixth and last part of the topic list handles the ‘durable-life-change’ part. In this part

following question is asked: “how can you prevent that former gang members fall back into old

habits?” At the end of the interview, the interviewer always asks the respondent if he or she

would like to talk about another topic which seems to be important to him or her regarding the

reintegration of gang members, in order to give the respondent the chance to add anything to the

interview.

3.3.4 Data analysis

The research data is analyzed using the qualitative software program Nvivo. Nvivo can facilitate

the coding of the transcribed interviews (Decorte, 2010). This helps to structure the findings on

45

processes of gang membership and integration into society, as it would otherwise be difficult to

derive these processes from a continuous text.

The coding tree which is used during the coding of the interviews is attached in annex (see

Annex 3). The coding tree is used to structure the interview data and to generate meaning to the

gathered information.

In order to be able to test or confirm the findings, the constant comparing method is used.

Already coded interview fragments are compared to new (yet to be coded) fragments (Decorte,

2010). This mainly implies that fragments on a particular concept, e.g. ‘community-based’, are

compared in order to obtain a nuanced view on how different organizations incorporate, for

example, the ‘community principle’ into their program.

3.3.5 Quality of research

In this part the measurements to ensure the validity and reliability of the data analysis, which

needs to guarantee the quality of the research, is discussed.

3.3.5.1 Validity

Two strategies are used during the data collection and analysis in order to guarantee the validity

of the research.

The first strategy that will be used is the ‘constant comparative method’. The constant

comparative method implies that all data fragments are to be analyzed and compared with the

other data fragments (Silverman, 2013). The constant comparative method is crucial for this

research, as the aim is to find out differences between all the different organizations and actors in

the field of reintegration of young gang members. Methods and findings from the programs of

non-governmental organizations are compared with intervention methods of governmental

organizations.

The second strategy used is the method of ‘comprehensive data treatment’. This method

resembles the previous, as it also implies that all data are to be analyzed, but it focuses more on

“anomalies or deviant cases” (Silverman, 2013, pp. 291-292). The aim of this method is to

achieve generalization of the data. During the data analysis it will become clear that the diverse

categories of respondents differ in their work and opinion on the reintegration of young gang

members. These differences are examined and analyzed simultaneously, in order to obtain

generalization of a theory.

46

3.3.5.2 Reliability

An additional two strategies are used during the data collection and analysis in order to guarantee

the reliability of the research.

The first strategy is the method of ‘low-inference descriptors’ (Silverman, 2013). During the data

analysis, the recorded interviews are transcribed very precisely (word for word). Although the

transcription and reporting are anonymously, other researchers could analyze the transcribed

interviews in order to investigate if they reach the same conclusions. In annex a list of the

interviews is provided (see annex 4). This list includes the date of interview, category of

respondent, and, if allowed, their function. For privacy reasons, no names are given.

The second strategy used, to guarantee the reliability of the research, is the method of

transparency (Maesschalck, 2010). This method builds upon the previous method, as it aims to

provide the data to other researchers. This method recognizes the problem of privacy, and as

mentioned above, no names are publicized. Notwithstanding the foregoing however,

transparency is persued, by reporting very precisely which methodological choices are made and

how those choices thus influence the results.

The above discussed methodology of research was used to implement our investigation on the

field. The results of this investigation are outlined in the next chapter.

4. Interview results

In this section the results of the data analysis will be exposed. The focus will be the main

research question: ‘How can young gang members reintegrate into society?’ which will be

answered via the following sub-questions:

1. For which reasons can young gang members leave the gang?

2. Which intervention methods can facilitate young gang members in their process of

leaving the gang and reintegrating in society?

In order to be able to answer these questions, we first need to know why youngsters get involved

with gangs in the first place. Secondly, the first sub-question regarding the ways of leaving a

gang will be discussed. Thirdly, the intervention methods used by Honduran organizations which

work on the reintegration of gang members will be presented and evaluated.

47

4.1 Gang involvement

Most respondents agree upon the fact that gang involvement is a gradual process whereby a

youngster has a first informal contact with gang members, then subsequently carries out some

small tasks. These tasks become increasingly more frequent and with greater responsibility, and

this eventually – after earning the gang’s trust – provides the youngster with a certain position

within the gang. M. Flores of Proyecto Victoria describes the hierarchy which the gang

maintains. On the lowest level we can find the Aspirant (Aspirante) and the Sympathizer

(Simpatizante), which do not yet belong to the gang. After going through the initiation rite, an

Aspirant or Sympathizer becomes a Newbie (Novato). The Newbie can later on evolve to a

Permanent Member (Miembro Permanente). On the highest level is the Leader (Líder) of the

group.

There are several reasons for a young girl or boy to get involved with a gang: firstly, the lack of

socio-economic opportunities in Honduras, which also include the high number of youngsters

not attending school; secondly, a (problematic) family and environmental situation in which a

youngster is raised; thirdly, the willingness to belong to a gang in order to maintain a certain

status within society; and fourthly, the fact that youngsters are seduced (whether or not using the

threat of violence) by the gang to become a part of their gang.

Firstly, according to Casa Alianza, more than 70% of the children in Honduras are raised in

poverty. Along with M. Obando and S. Stadthagen, they state that these children often grow up

without a father (according to C. Díaz, 70% grow up in single mother families), little or no

access to proper healthcare, education, recreation, or a job. Although the work opportunities are

scarce, S. Stadthagen states that children growing up in a single parent household, are often

obliged to go out to work, in order to sustain their family. On the other hand, M. Flores states

that 816.000 youngster in Honduras are not going to school or working, and are, also according

to M. Obando, most likely to be found on the streets or forming part of a gang. Also O. Lopez

confirms that not going to school forms a risk for gang involvement. Along with S. Stadhagen,

M. Obando and the Pastor argue that one of the problems of children not going to school is the

fact that elementary schools and especially higher education schools are not within reach of

youngsters living in rural or remote areas.

48

Imagine a child, an adolescent, without the posibility of going to school or they [his

parents - EVD] did not register him into school; in his household there is possibly no

father or the present father is violent or a violent stepfather; the economic situation is

very limited; there is access to drugs; his community is dark 24 hours a day; he does not

have, let’s say, services which middle class boys have. That is, all those limitations lead

him towards the side of these groups. (D. Urbina, personal communication, August 22,

2013)39

Even though youngsters grow up in the same area, some of them might get involved with a gang,

while others might not, because of a difference in opportunities. I. Pereyra argues that

youngsters, who are financially and emotionally supported by their family to go to school, are

less likely to form part of a gang. Also the community police officer states that youngsters that

do not receive the necessary support from their parents or family could have a greater motivation

to become involved with a gang.

On top of that, C. Díaz discusses that even for those who graduate from university; there is a

great lack of employment opportunities. This lack of employment is also according to our other

respondents a risk factor for gang involvement. I. Pereyra states that youngsters are attracted to

job opportunities within a gang (e.g. selling drugs), because they can easily earn a lot of money.

Secondly, the problematic family situation of a child can also have an influence on one’s

involvement with a gang. As already stated above by M. Obando and C. Díaz, a lot of

households in Honduras are run by a single mother. M. Obando adds that parents are often

irresponsible towards their children and do not control them enough.

Also, another factor is the parents’ permissiveness, right. Parents allow a lot of things

they are unaware, right, of the objective of the youngsters. For example: many parents

39

“Imagínate un niño, un adolecente, que no tiene posibilidades de ir a la escuela o no le matriculan en la escuela;

que posiblemente es su hogar no exista un papa o el papa que existe es un violento o un padrastro violento; el nivel

económico es muy limitado; existe acceso a drogas; las 24 horas del día su comunidad es obscura; no tiene,

digamos, servicios que tienen los muchachos de clase media. O sea, todas estas limitaciones lo guían hacia la parte

de estos grupos.” (D. Urbina, personal communication, August 22, 2013).

49

allow their children to go to wherever they want, without knowing the risks that are

present in those areas. (M. Obando, personal communication, August 28, 2013)40

On the other hand, A. Rodriguez does believe that parents take their responsibilities towards their

children in sending them to school. He states that youngsters simply cannot find the affection and

values they are seeking for within their family and thus try to encounter this within a gang.

M. Obando and O. Lopez also highlight the impact of domestic violence on children. When

children grow up in an environment where violence from the husband towards his wife or, from

the parents towards their children occurs on a frequent basis, these children are also more likely

to be violent towards other people. Besides violence, the poverty in which a child has been raised

also forms a risk for becoming involved with a gang.

Next, it became attractive especially for the youngsters who have suffered from domestic

violence, who have lived in the streets, who have become orphans. So they encounter,

within gangs, a surrogate home; where they are fed, where they are dressed, where they

are accepted, they have their norms of the violent situation; but it is something the family

or society cannot give them. (the Pastor, personal communication, August 23, 2013)41

On the other hand, I. Pereyra argues that not all gang members come from a poor family. He

states that “there are also people that even though they have economic stability, they do not have

social stability or social stability at home. En the group [i.e. gang] does give them this stability;

so they become part of the group” (I. Pereyra, personal communication, August 27, 2013).42

Most respondents agree upon the fact that youngsters seek for emotional support within a gang,

which they sometimes cannot encounter within their own family. Or, as stated by A. Rodriguez

40

“Igualmente, otro factor es la permisividad de los padres, verdad. Los padres permiten muchas cosas que no

saben, verdad, cual es el objetivo de los jóvenes. Por ejemplo: muchos padres dejan que sus hijos vayan a cualquier

lugar sin saber los peligros que representan estos lugares.” (M. Obando, personal communication, August 28,

2013). 41

“Luego, fue como atractivo especialmente para jóvenes que han sufrido violencia familiar, que han vivido en la

calle, que han quedado huérfanos. Entonces ellos encuentran, al interior de las pandillas, como un hogar

sustitutivo; donde se alimentan, donde se visten, donde ellos son aceptado, tengan sus normas de la situación

violenta; pero es algo lo que la familia o la sociedad no les puede dar.” (the Pastor, personal communication,

August 23, 2013). 42

“también hay personas que aun que tengan estabilidad económica no tienen estabilidad social o estabilidad

social en sus hogares. Y el grupo si le da esta estabilidad; entonces, se hace parte del grupo.” (I. Pereyra, personal

communication, August 27, 2013).

50

(personal communication, August 26, 2013): “[it is - EVD] like an alternative, this lack, this

lack of affection which – and this is how they enter the gang, right.”43

Last, but not least, some of our respondents (O. Lopez, M. Flores and the community police

officer) mentioned that while parental control is often lacking, the media have an influence on

children’s behavior. According to them, the media portray violence as a common issue within

society and make it look like something natural to do.

Thirdly, according to our respondents, youngsters often want to belong to a gang in order to

achieve a certain status within society and to encounter a place where they can develop their

identity.

Interviewer: And what do they find within a gang?

Interviewee: The feeling of belonging, which they do not have at their homes;

unconditional support, despite of what they do; and also the economical aspect. And all

the prestige, reputation within the communities where they live. (Community police

officer, personal communication, August 30, 2013)44

The importance of the feeling of belonging to a group and to be recognized in such a way, of

solidarity within the group, and the feeling to be able to exercise a certain power over others, is

also confirmed by the Pastor, I. Pereyra, E. Bardales, O. Lopez and M. Flores. According to E.

Bardales, youngsters are attracted to the lifestyle of gang members, which is often referred to as

“living the crazy live” (E. Bardales, personal communication, August 22, 2013).45

Fourthly, F. Hernández mentioned that there are 20 to 30 vulnerable neighborhoods in

Tegucigalpa, where gangs dominate. When youngsters grow up in the aforementioned

circumstances, they easily get in contact with a gang which can sustain him with security,

financial goods, friendship, recreation, and sexual amusement; “they offer you protection, they

can offer you amusement, the type of amusement like drug consumption, sex, money; they help

43

“Como un alternativa, esta falta, esta carencia de afecto que – y así se entran en la pandilla, verdad.” (A.

Rodriguez, personal communication, August 26, 2013). 44

“Entrevistador: ¿Y que encuentran entonces en la pandilla?

Entrevistado: El sentido de pertenencia, que no tienen dentro de sus hogares; apoyo incondicional, a pesar de lo

que hagan; y también el aspecto económico. Y tanto de prestigio, reputación dentro de las comunidades en las

cuales ellos habitan.” (Community police officer, personal communication, August 30, 2013) 45

“vivir la vida loca” (E. Bardales, personal communication, Augsuts 22, 2013).

51

you when your family has problems or when someone is locked up in prison” (U. Herrera,

personal communication, September 27, 2013).46

According to U. Herrera, it also frequently

happens that youngsters are blackmailed by their local ruling gang. If they do not agree to carry

out a certain task, the gang threatens the youngster and/or his family with violence and

sometimes even with death. U. Herrera (personal communication, September 27, 2013) states

that: “those who are not willing to join a gang will be hurt or their family will be hurt”. 47

All respondents confirm that in order to enter a gang and be part of the gang includes committing

and undergoing certain types of violence, from beating up someone to killing a rival gang

member. Sociologist E. Bardales, along with U. Herrera and the Pastor, state that youngsters who

enter a gang are aware of these risks and dangers, but they just do not see any alternative way of

living.

We all know it; we all know it, that in order to integrate in a gang I have to integrate a

share of blood. I.e. by executing [someone else - EVD], participating in an armed violent

act or I myself suffered the consequences. (E. Bardales, personal communication, August

22, 2013)48

4.2 Leaving the gang

This section concerns the first sub-question: ‘How and for which reasons can young gang

members leave the gang?’ The reasons a gang member can or wants to leave his gang will be

discussed, as well as the ways of leaving the gang. Knowing that leaving a gang is not an easy

task, attention will also be given to the difficulties one can encounter when leaving a gang.

4.2.1 (Personal) reasons to leave the gang

There are several reasons for gang members to leave their gang: firstly, choosing an alternative

way of living or outgrowing; secondly, reasons associated with the gang related violence one has

46

“te ofrecen una protección, te pueden ofrecer diversión, tipo de diversión como consumo de drogas, sexo, dinero;

te apoyan si tu familia tiene problemas o cuando este alguien en preso interno” (U. Herrera, personal

communication, September 27, 2013). 47

“El que no se ingresa a la pandilla te van hacer daño a ti o a la familia” (U. Herrera, personal communication,

September 27, 2013). 48

Todos lo sabemos; todos lo sabemos, que para ingresar a una mara o pandilla debo de integrar a una cuota de

sangre. O sea por medio de la ejecución, de participaciones en un acto violento armado o yo mismo sufrí las

consecuencias. (E. Bardales, personal communication, August 22, 2013)

52

to deal with within a gang and the fear of dying within the gang; thirdly, family reasons and/or

external opportunities (e.g. a legal job).

Firstly, A. Rodriguez states that some gang members leave their gang, because of an outgrowing

process. Upon becoming an adult, they realize they have other, greater responsibilities (e.g.

taking care of their family), which they cannot fulfill by maintaining their current lifestyle. The

community police officer confirms that gang members might leave their gang when they grow

older and realize that what they are doing is not right. Also Casa Alianza knows youngsters that

used to form part of a gang and are currently trying to convince other youngsters to leave behind

the violence.

I. Pereyra also confirms that gang members, at some point in their life mature and no longer want

to continue with all the violence. D. Urbina (personal communication, August 22, 2013) agrees

and states that: “when they leave, it is because they are exhausted. …. when they are exhausted

and discover that perhaps the solidarity they believed to encounter in this world, is not so much

solidarity.”49

Secondly, M. Flores states that youngsters, when joining a gang, are often biased regarding the

motives of the gang. He states that:

Initially their aim to enter a gang was self protection, self motivation, hanging out with

nice cloths, tennis [shoes - EVD], having Money, having drugs, going out with women,

having a gun. Afterwards, he has to rob, he has to kidnap, he has to extort, and he even

has to kill. (M. Flores, personal communication, August 29, 2013)50

As mentioned above by I Pereyra, gang members might reach a point where they cannot take the

amount of violence anymore and thus decide to leave the gang.

The greatest motivation, according to M. Flores and U. Herrera, to leave the gang, is the fact that

the youngsters, after committing acts of crime and violence, start to realize they have enemies,

49

“Cuando se salen, es porque ellos se agotan. … cuando ellos se agotan y descubren de que tal vez la solidaridad

que ellos creyeron encontrar en este mundo no es tanta solidaridad” (D. Urbina, personal communication, August

22, 2013) 50

“Al principio el objetivo de ellos para entrar era autoprotección, auto motivación, andar con buena ropa, tenis,

andar con dinero, andar con drogas, andar con mujeres, andar con un arma. Después él tiene que robar, tiene que

secuestrar, tiene que extorsionar, e incluso tiene que matar.” (M. Flores, personal communication, August 29,

2013)

53

and they start to realize they might end up being killed or, as stated by the community police,

they fear for their family to be assassinated. In addition, S. Stadthagen (personal communication,

August 29, 2013) states that gang members are “pursued by everyone”.51

The Pastor and I.

Pereyra also mention that gang members might want to leave the gang, not only for the fear of

external violence, but also for the fear and suffering of internal violence, within the group.

So, motivation: no longer doing this, because they end up having four enemies: enemy

number one: the opposite group, the opposite gang; enemy number two: the police, that

in a fight, a … until he converts into an enemy, a member of the group with the police and

they kill one another, so they are perceived as an enemy; three: people in society who

have felts aggrieved or offended by this group. Many people, who suffered a death of a

relative, are seeking for this group, this member, in order to kill him likewise; and the

fourth enemy comes to be his own friend or partner of the group. When he wants to leave,

this leads to the death; this is what they call in their jargon “giving green light”. (M.

Flores, personal communication, August 29, 2013)52

Internal group dynamics can also play a role in one’s decision to leave the gang. The Pastor

states that one might leave the gang when he or she has “committed an act against the gang”

(Pastor, personal communication, August 23, 2013).53

Or, as mentioned by I. Pereyra, when the

bond with the group or neighborhood (barrio) is not strong enough, or when a gang member is

not able to reach a higher level within the gang, he or she might find it a better solution to leave

the gang.

Thirdly, according to Casa Alianza, a gang member will only consider leaving his gang when he

encounters a better alternative. Though, this is where the problem rises, as there is a lack of

employment and other opportunities within the country. Other reasons mentioned are the family

51

“perseguidos por todo” (S. Stadthagen, personal communication, August 29, 2013). 52

“Entonces, motivación: ya no seguir haciendo esto, porque llega tener cuatro enemigos: enemigo número uno: el

grupo contrario, la mara contraria; enemigo número dos: la policía, que en una refriega, una … hasta que se

convierte enemigo, el miembro de un grupo con la policía y se mata uno otro, entonces se toma como un enemigo;

tres: personas de la sociedad que se han sentido agraviadas o ofendidas por esto grupo. Muchas personas, que

sufrieron una muerte de un familiar, andan buscando ese grupo, ese miembro, para darle muerte igualmente

también; y el cuarto enemigo viene ser su mismo amigo o compañero del grupo. Cuando el ya se quiere salir, este le

termina dando muerte; es lo que llaman en el jargón de ellos “darle luz verde”.” (M. Flores, personal

communication, August 29, 2013) 53

“… cometido un acto en contra de la pandilla” (Pastor, personal communication, August 23, 2013).

54

who asks or begs the gang member to leave or the gang member who wants to submit himself to

God and the bible.

As mentioned above in regard of the maturing process of gang members, and highlighted by the

Pastor, I. Pereyra, A. Rodriguez, D. Urbina and S. Stadthagen, once a gang member becomes a

father or a mother, he or she starts thinking differently and might not want their children to live

the same life as they did. The latter could be a reason for them to leave the gang. Other

respondents state that if we want gang members to leave their gang, certain guarantees must be

given to the youngster, which gives him or her a possibility to leave the gang and reintegrate into

society.

I think there should be social conditions which can guarantee that these persons will not

be persecuted; that doors will open for these persons, right; and that we should continue

to believe that they form part of our society, not that they are maladapted to our society.

(I. Pereyra, personal communication, August 27, 2013)54

Concerning external opportunities, the community police officer states that a gang member

would be willing to leave his gang when he finds a job or alternative, although legal, way of

earning money. But the lack of employment, as stated by M. Obando, is an interfering problem

which hinders one’s social reintegration process into society.

4.2.2 Ways of leaving the gang

When a gang member is willing to leave his gang, he has only a few options to do so: converting

to religion, seeking for refuge in an institution or fleeing the country; though the latter is not that

obvious.

According to a majority of our respondents, it is difficult for a gang member to leave his or her

gang, without being assassinated. Even though M. Obando (personal communication, August 28,

2013) agrees, she also thinks there is a non-violent way to leave the gang, which is by converting

to religion: “Here in Honduras, the boys can only leave the gang for two reasons: or because

they enter the church and they allow them to leave the gang if they dedicate themselves to the

54

“Yo pienso que tiene que haber condiciones sociales que puedan garantizar que estas personas no van a ser

perseguidas; de que estas personas se van abrir puertas, verdad; y que seguimos creyendo que son parte de nuestra

sociedad, no que son desadaptada de la sociedad.” (I. Pereyra, personal communication, August 27, 2013)

55

things of God, or because they die.”55

M. Obando further states that gang members leaving the

gang with permission have more chances to survive.

U. Herrera and I. Pereyra agree upon the fact that gang members can ask permission to their

leader to leave the gang, in order to become a member of a church. Though the director of Casa

Alianza states this does not happen frequently, and I. Pereyra (personal communication, August

27, 2013) also mentioned he or she “should keep, as we say “straight” or well behaved”.56

Also

C. Díaz (personal communication, August 28, 2013) confirms: “you cannot go out with women,

you cannot smoke, and you cannot drink. You have to go to church every day; there can be no

days on which you do not go to church. If they see him on a party … they give him green light

and he dies.”57

I. Pereyra delves deeper into the question by saying that those who try to leave

their gang, without converting to religion, will always be associated to a gang, even though he or

she is not involved with illicit activities anymore. Though F. Hernández is more critical towards

the possibility of leaving a gang by converting to religion; according to him it has become more

difficult to leave, as he states:

In its moment the church was the primary and only alternative, but nowadays it has

changed, as they [gang members – EVD] say they [those who want to leave the gang –

EVD] have played too much with the faith. Even when they are not [anymore – EVD]

with the gang, they keep on doing the same thing. (F. Hernández, personal

communication, August 29, 2013)58

G. Ruelas states that young gang members who want to leave their gang, in order not to be

assassinated either seek refuge in an institution (like Casa Alianza) or flee their country. Though

M. Obando highlights the dangerous of fleeing the country, as in most cases this occurs in illegal

and unsafe circumstances.

55

“Aquí en Honduras los muchachos solo pueden abandonar la pandilla por dos razones: o porque entran a la

iglesia y les permitan abandonar la pandilla si les dedican a las cosas de Dios, o porque se mueren” (M. Obando,

personal communication, August 28, 2013). 56

“tiene que andar, como nosotros lo decimos ‘derechito’, o sea bien portado” (I. Pereyra, personal

communication, August 27, 2013). 57

“no puedes andar con mujeres, no puedes fumar, no puedes beber. Tiene que ir a la iglesia todos los días, no hay

días que no vayas a la iglesia. Si lo ven en una fiesta…, le dan luz verde y se muere” (C. Díaz, personal

communication, August 28, 2013). 58

“en su momento la iglesia era la alternativa primordial y la única, pero ahora ha cambiado, porque ellos dicen

que han jugado mucho con la fe. Y no están con la pandilla, pero siguen haciendo cosas” (F. Hernández, personal

communication, August 29, 2013).

56

According to M. Flores it is very important that youngsters take the personal decision to leave

their gang, without being forced by others. He adds that Proyecto Victoria only works with ex-

gang members who left the gang and are willing to be involved in the project on a voluntary

basis. Also the Pastor and A. Rodriguez confirm leaving the gang should be one’s personal

decision.

In this section we only discussed possibilities of leaving the gang, in order to be able reintegrate

into society. Though, according to some of our respondents, this should not always necessarily

be the case. As the Pastor (personal communication, August 23, 2013) we interviewed states:

“Although they say they always take the decision independently, but they continue to belong to

the neighborhood (‘barrio’).”59

I. Pereyra also states that forming part of a group is something

that is in the nature of every human being. Though the acts the group performs might not always

be positive, the structure of the group as such is not necessarily negative; as gangs, according to

I. Pereyra, often are very well structured and maintain a rather strict hierarchy.

It is that removing them from the context of the gang, in my way, viewing the things in my

experience, cannot be an objective. You have to see that they already constructed a set of

values and within their set of values do not think one of their values is to kill the people

that are my enemies, no. It is defending my neighborhood and loving it. It is a concept of

love of belonging; of respect, like I said. (I. Pereyra, personal communication, August 27,

2013)60

E. Bardales states he does not ask the youngsters to leave their gang anymore, because he noticed

how difficult it is for them to do, mindful of the risks associated to doing so. Rather, he

advocates a process of easing out, whereby the gang members commit less violence and

participate less in illicit activities.

59

“Aunque ellos dicen que siempre independiente la decisión que toman, pero ellos siguen perteneciendo al barrio”

(the Pastor, personal communication, August 23, 2013). 60

“Es que sacarlos del contexto de la pandilla, a mi modo, ver las cosas en mi experiencia, no puede ser un

objetivo. Usted tiene que ver que ellos ya tienen construido un conjunto de valor y dentro de su conjunto de valores

no crea usted que uno de sus valores es matar a todas las personas que son mis enemigos, no. Es defender mi barrio

y amarlo. Es un concepto de amor de la pertenencia; de respeto como le decía.” (I. Pereyra, personal

communication, August 27, 2013)

57

4.2.3 Difficulties of leaving the gang

As mentioned in the previous part, leaving the gang is not always a sinecure. One most cope with

the possibility of reprisals by their gang and also with a society that is not willing to give them a

second chance.

According to our respondents it depends on the level of integration within a gang, whether or not

a member can (successfully) leave the gang. According to M. Flores, Sympathizers and

Aspirants have up to 90% chances to leave the gang, as they have not gone through the initiation

rite yet. Once initiated, a Newbie has only 50% chances to leave the gang. S. Stadthagen

(personal communication, August 29, 2013) confirms this by saying: “once they have gone

through the initiation rite, it is very difficult to leave”.61

A Permanent Member has 30-40%

chances and a Leader has no less than 5-10% chances to leave the gang. The more a member is

integrated within a gang, the slower the rehabilitation and reintegration process or

“psychological deprogramming” (M. Flores, personal communication, August 29, 2013)

process,62

which we will discuss in the next part, evolves. Also, U. Herrera states gang leaders

are often the ones with psychiatric problems, which require more and more specific attention

during the process of rehabilitation.

As mentioned above and confirmed by the experiences of M. Flores and S. Stadthagen, leaving

the gang is often not possible and surely not without any risk. If a youngster gets permission

from the gang to leave, he will be followed (shadowed) for one to two years and if he does

anything wrong, i.e. if he starts using drugs again or commits any crime, the gang will execute

him.

And when a boy left a gang and enters a church and they find out he steels, that he

started using drugs again or something else, the kill him. And one already knows what

the sign is: they put a Bible on his chest and… the mouth. They kill him because he did

61

“si han pasado el rito de inserción, es muy difícil de salir” (S. Stadthagen, personal communication, August 29,

2013). 62

“desprogramación psicológica” (M. Flores, personal communication, August 29, 2013).

58

not comply with what he was offered, right. (M. Obando, personal communication,

August 28, 2013)63

When the gang suspects one of their members of possibly leaving the gang and betraying the

group, that member gets “Green Light”.

Green light is when they see someone wants to leave, betraying the group. So, in some

cases they know a lot: the hierarchical order, the structure, how the commands are given,

where the infiltrations are, etc. Thus, by knowing a lot, they end up killing him, because

he wants to leave and he would possibly discusses or discloses names, strategies and all

those things. (M. Flores, personal communication, August 29, 2013)64

Many respondents, including academics such as sociologist C. Nuñez from UNAH, and social

workers, like E. Bardales and S. Stadthagen, raised the issue of stigmatization by society, which

impedes the reintegration process of (ex-) gang members. Most blame the government, with the

repressive Mano Dura laws, but equally so the media, which often publishes articles on gang

violence and assassination (which is in fact not always linked to gangs). The Pastor states that

while the government implemented these strict so-called Anti-gang laws, they did not invest in

the necessary conditions or platforms to give the youngsters a second chance. The Honduran

citizens are very dismissive regarding (ex-) gang members and do not believe in second chances

or the fact that a person could change. The tattoos some gang members have on visible spots,

like their arms or faces, often refer to a particular gang. Thus, even when a youngster left his

gang, his tattoos will remind others of his affiliation with a gang.

It is extremely difficult for a person to leave a gang, here in Honduras. In the sense that

we are a society that stigmatizes people. It is to say, here, the simple fact that you see a

tattooed person, here they already associate the person with being a drug addict, they

63

“Y si un muchacho abandonó a una pandilla y entra en una iglesia y encuentran que roba, que volvió a usar

drogas o algo, lo matan. Y uno ya sabe cuál es el signo: le ponen una Biblia sobre el pecho y… la boca. Lo matan

porque no cumplió con lo que había ofrecido, verdad.” (M. Obando, personal communication, August 28, 2013) 64

“Luz verde es cuando miran que uno se quiere salir traicionando el grupo. Entonces, en algunos casos saben

bastante: el orden jerárquico, la estructura, como van los mandos, donde están las infiltraciones, etcétera.

Entonces, al saber bastante, terminan dándole muerte, porque se quiere salir y posiblemente comente o divulgue

nombres, estrategias y todas esas cosas.” (M. Flores, personal communication, August 29, 2013)

59

associate him with being a person that can be involved in criminal activities.

(Community police officer, personal communication, August 30, 2013)65

According to D. Urbina and M. Obando it is thus very important to remove the tattoos, in order

to prevent further stigmatization. But according to other respondents the removal of tattoos is not

sufficient, as society is not willing to give an ex-gang member a second chance.

The NGO, working with youth, also warns for the net-widening of stigmatization. Not only

juvenile gangs, but also other groups of youngsters are being stigmatized and blamed for

violence in the community. “We did not have the phenomenon of stigmatization of barras, like

we have today, but it mutated after the phenomenon, because the gangs were the first to

radicalize” (NGO, working with youth, personal communication, August 22, 2013).66

The above discussed difficulties to leave the gang all refer to external actors or acts, which

hinder the reintegration process. Additionally, there are internal aspects, within the personality of

the gang member himself, that impede the reintegration process. As I. Pereyra mentioned:

Even though he leaves the gang, within himself he built his identity, he may still have the

whole idea of the neighborhood. …. You do not take out their neighborhood. They

continue speaking the same; they continue thinking the same; they continue to feel the

same. (I. Pereyra, personal communication, August 27, 2013)67

When taking into account all the above mentioned difficulties to leave a gang, one might

consider staying in the gang, in order not to be exposed to the risks and hazards when leaving the

gang. As already mentioned by I. Pereyra, J. Flores confirms that gang members incorporate a

certain lifestyle. J. Flores states youngsters might be willing to stay in the gang, because the only

thing they know is “collect the war tax, killing and all”,68

and gang members would feel obliged

to stay in the gang, because “if I leave here, I will starve. I cannot maintain my family, I will not

65

“Es sumamente difícil para que una persona abandone una pandilla aquí en Honduras. En el sentido de que

somos una sociedad que estigmatiza a las personas. O sea aquí, el simple hecho que usted vea a una persona

tatuada, aquí ya lo asocien que es una persona adicta a las drogas, le asocien a que es una persona que puede estar

involucrado en actividades criminales.” (Community police officer, personal communication, August 30, 2013) 66

“No teníamos el fenómeno de estigmatización de barras como ahora, pero va mutado después del fenómeno,

porque se radicalizo primero a las maras” (NGO, working with youth, personal communication, August 22, 2013). 67

“Aunque se salga de la pandilla, él dentro de sí mismo construía su identidad, puede tener todavía toda la idea

del barrio. …. Tú no sacas el barrio de ellos. Ellos siguen hablando igual, siguen creyendo igual, siguen pensando

igual, siguen sintiendo igual” (I. Pereyra, personal communication, August 27, 2013) 68

“cobrar el impuesto de guerra, sicarito y todo” (J. Flores, personal communication, September 27, 2013).

60

have the power I have, I will not have the vehicle that I maybe have” (J. Flores, personal

communication, September 27, 2013).69

According to U. Herrera, another reason to stay in the

gang is to take revenge on those who killed their relatives; or as stated by the Director of Casa

Alianza:

So even though I am in a gang, I suffer violence there, but I am respected by the police, I

am respected and feared by society, by the police and some form of this violence.

Although inside [the gang – EVD] I suffer from more controlled violence. When I am not

a member of the gang, then I will be followed by social actors and I will also be followed

by the gang. (G. Ruelas, personal communication, September 27, 2013)70

4.3 Reintegration into society

Regarding the methods and tools of reintegration of young (ex-) gang members, the following

parts, which are also outlined in table one, will be discussed: the community based principle,

psychological attention, medical attention, vocational training and employment. These aspects

are outlined with examples from the field in Annex 6.

4.3.1 Community based

The four most discussed community based reintegration tools will be highlighted in this section:

the local community, the family, the school, and the church or religious community.

Local community

According to the majority of our respondents, the reintegration process should take place as close

to one’s community as possible. O. Lopez, I. Pereyra, A. Rodriguez and D. Urbina also state that

it is important to focus, during the rehabilitation process, on rebuilding or strengthening the

relationship with the community. A reconciliation process should take place, whereby the people

of the local community are willing to give the ex-gang member a second chance.

69

“si me salgo aquí, muero de hambre. No puedo mantener a mi familia, no voy a tener el poder que tengo, no voy

a tener el vehículo tal vez que tengo” 70

“Entonces aunque si yo estoy en una pandilla, sufro violencia allí, pero soy respetado por la policía, soy

respectado y temido, por la sociedad, por la policía y cierta forma de esta violencia. Aunque adentro sufro violencia

más controlado. Si no soy miembro de la pandilla, entonces voy a ser seguido por actores sociales y voy a ser

seguido también por la pandilla.” (G. Ruelas, personal communication, September 27, 2013)

61

The so-called truce between the MS 13 and the Barrio 18, as discussed by U. Herrera, I. Pereyra

and D. Urbina, is an example of reconciliation between gang members and society. Though, not

everyone is convinced of this truce; as the community police officer (personal communication,

August 30, 2013) stated: “What happened here was a presentation of some gang members,

whereby they asked society to forgive them for the crimes they have committed; but they keep on

doing the same thing”.71

M. Obando and G. Ruelas talked about the recuperation of public spaces, as another example of

bringing together the community. According to G. Ruelas, in order to unite the community and

reduce the violence, more community events, like sports, music, theater and other festivities,

should be organized and, in order to guarantee the safety, supervised by the police.

Although most of our respondents agree upon the fact that the process of rehabilitation and

reintegration should take place as close to one’s local community as possible, some respondents

stressed the possible dangers of rehabilitation and reintegration in one’s own community.

According to the community police officer (personal communication, August 30, 2013) it can be

necessary to:

“Also relocate them to other places where the environment is not that hostile. Because it

is of no use to grab a gang member, remove him, take him for a treatment and put him

back in the same place. He will return to [do – EVD] the same thing.”72

As we will see in the ‘Education’ section, also Proyecto Victoria focuses more on isolating a

gang member from his environment, in order to protect him from any external violence or

reprisals.

Family

According to our respondents, it is necessary to include the family aspect into the reintegration

process of youth gang members. According to M. Flores, M. Obando and G. Ruelas it is

71

“Aquí lo que hubo fue una presentación de algunos miembros de pandillas, en lo cual ellos solamente pidieron

perdón a la sociedad, por el crimen que han cometido; y siguiendo lo mismo.” (Community police officer, personal

communication, August 30, 2013) 72

“reubicarlos también en otros lugares donde el ambiente no sea hostil pues. Porque de nada nos sirve agarrar un

miembro de la mara, sacarlo, llevarlo dar un tratamiento y volver meterlo en el mismo lugar. Vuelve de lo mismo”

(Community police officer, personal communication, August 30, 2013).

62

important to maintain regular contact with the family during the rehabilitation process and to

receive the family’s cooperation, in order to be able to reintegrate the youngster into his family

and community in a later stage.

And the third step, that within the rehabilitation, because we are talking about social

reinsertion; which is: a new approach with the family, no boy leaves a gang alone. They

cannot, they cannot. Either with his original family or with the new family he has,

because very early they have a family. (M. Obando, personal communication, August 28,

2013)73

M. Flores, U. Herrera and M. Obando state family counseling can be useful to strengthen or

rebuild the family ties. For M. Flores (personal communication, August 29, 2013) this family

counseling includes that “we talk about this situation, about the fact that at their homes there

should be a fortitude that avoids drugs and violence”.74

M. Obando states the support of the family is an important asset. When the family lacks the

necessary resources to support their child (e.g. in sending their child to school), the family

should, according to the community police officer, C. Díaz and U. Herrera, receive support in

order to comply with its obligations towards their son or daughter.

The Emanuelito Project works with street children, but they are children at risk of gangs.

Because of that they work with the child and the family. So they do work holistically. And

when the mother has no job and does not know how to maintain, then they support the

mother so that she is also able to maintain her family. (C. Díaz, personal communication,

August 28, 2013)75

73

“Y el tercer paso, que dentro de la rehabilitación, porque estamos hablando de la reinserción social; que es: un

nuevo acercamiento con la familia, ningún muchacho sale de una pandilla solo. No pueden, no pueden. Sea con su

familia originaria o con la nueva familia que tienen, porque tienen familia muy temprano.” (M. Obando, personal

communication, August 28, 2013) 74

“… sobre que en el logar debe existir una fortaleza que evite drogas, violencia” (M. Flores, personal

commumnication, August 29, 2013). 75

“El Proyecto Emanuelito trabaja con niños en calle, pero son niños en riesgo de maras. Por eso ellos trabajan

con el niño y con la familia. Entonces ellos si trabajan de manera integral. Y si la mama no tiene un oficio y no sabe

a como mantener, entonces ellos ayuden a la mama para que también pueda sostener a su familia.” (C. Díaz,

personal communication, August 28, 2013)

63

Education

After being brought back in contact with the family, Casa Alianza makes sure the youngster

picks up his educational studies again. Moreover, the NGO working with youth helps youngsters

to seek and participate in educational opportunities; as this keeps youngsters away from the street

and from gangs. “They do not go to school, so in the end many children are recruited by

gangs…” (NGO working with youth, personal communication, August 22, 2013).76

Also U.

Herrera, O. Lopez, M. Obando and A. Rodriguez confirm the importance of reinserting the

youngster into the educational system, as part of his reintegration process. Though M. Obando

admits that going to school is not a guarantee to stay out of a gang, but at school the teachers can

at least get a sense of what is going on in their pupils’ lives and possibly act upon this.

One example of a additional school-based method to keep children of the street is the ‘Open

School’ (‘Escuelas Abiertas’) system.

The teachers are now obliged to go [to school – EVD] the Saturday mornings. Said the

minister of education the other day, and he is right, if Saturday in the morning of the day

the teachers do not give classes or they do not want to do anything with the children, the

mere fact they are at school already separates them half a day from the street. So with the

Scout Association of Honduras, the National Prevention Program is making an effort to

train teachers. And those weekends the school remains open, but not only for the

children, also for the parents, to do some activities. (M. Obando, personal comunication,

August 28, 2013)77

Proyecto Victoria, on the other hand, does not have contact with the school were the youngster

used to go to, because they want to protect the ex-gang members, involved in the rehabilitation

program, from reprisals by former schoolmates or gang members.

76

“Ellos no van a la escuela, entonces al final muchos niños están reclutadas por las maras…” (NGO working with

youth, personal communication, August 22, 2013). 77

“Los maestros están obligado ahora ir los sábados por la mañana. Dice el otro día el ministro de educación, y

tiene mucha razón, si el sábado en la jornada de la mañana los maestros no le dan clases o no quieren hacer nada

con los niños, el solo hecho que estén en la escuela ya los separa media jornada de la calle. Entonces con lo

Asociación de Scout de Honduras, el Programa Nacional de Prevención está haciendo un esfuerzo de formación de

los maestros. Y estos fines de semana la escuela permanece abierta pero no solamente para los niños, también para

los padres, para hacer algunas actividades.” (M. Obando, personal comunication, August 28, 2013)

64

With his school no. Because many times – for example, the boy is from San Pedro Sula,

he comes up here incognito. So, we cannot go and say “he is there in Proyecto Victoria”,

because it can be dangerous; they can come over here to remove him from the

rehabilitation center. (M. Flores, personal communication, August 29, 2013)78

Church and religion

Generally, all our respondents, academics as well as social workers, acknowledge the positive

influence of religion regarding the rehabilitation and reintegration process of ex-gang members.

Proyecto Victoria uses the Bible to draw similarities between the life of a gang member and what

is written in the Bible, in order to convince youngsters of the fact they all receive a second

chance from God, regardless of what they did wrong in their past.

So, we tell them that God is not there to point out or judge anyone. Likewise we are [not

– EVD] there to point out, nor to judge anyone. We do what the Bible says. The Bible

says: “… therefore, if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature”. The old things have

passes and here all things become new. So, we talk a lot about forgiveness. (M. Flores,

personal communication, August 29, 2013)79

Though E. Bardales does not perceive religion as the ultimate solution in rehabilitating ex-gang

members, he does believe in the strength of the dynamics of religious groups.

Interviewer: And how about religiong, like the Christian or Catholic Church? What is

your opinion on that?

Interviewee: It is not a solution. It is a partial response. During my best moment of social

work with gangs, I articulated religion as part of the response model. And not so much

78

“Con la escuela de él, no. Porque muchas veces – por ejemplo, el muchacho es de San Pedro Sula, viene hasta

acá de manera incógnita. Entonces, no podemos ir a decir “allá en Proyecto Victoria esta él”, porque puede ser

peligroso; pueden venirse allá irlo a sacar del centro de rehabilitación.” (M. Flores, personal communication,

August 29, 2013) 79

“Entonces, les hablamos que Dios no está para señalar, ni juzgar a nadie. Igualmente nosotros estamos para

señalar, ni juzgar a nadie. Hacemos lo que dice la biblia. Dice la biblia: “… por tanto si alguno está en Cristo,

nueva creatura es”. Las cosas viejas pasaron y aquí todos son hechas nuevas. Entonces, hablamos bastante del

perdón.” (M. Flores, personal communication, August 29, 2013)

65

for the theological inspiration, no. But for the dynamics of the religious groups, because

they are dynamic. (E. Bardales, personal communication, August 22, 2013)80

However, C. Díaz also refers to the limitations of religion in regard of the rehabilitation of ex-

gang members, as religious methods are often only based on the word of God and lack in most

cases the aspect of a psychological support.

According to the community police officer, religious people, especially from the Christian

community, can facilitate the access to certain areas in conflict and thereby assist the community

police in their work, as they often more easily receive access to certain areas than others.

The Pastor we interviewed works with all sorts of inmates. Of those belonging to a gang, he

experiences that members of Barrio 18 are more attached to God than MS 13. This has as a

consequence that it is easier for a Barrio 18 member to leave his gang when converting to

religion, than it is for a MS 13 member. One reason, according to our respondents, might be the

fact that MS 13 have a more rigid structure, whereby it is more difficult to get out of this

structure.

4.3.3 Psychological treatment

The psychologists we interviewed, C. Díaz and I. Pereyra, underscore the importance of

including psychological treatment in the rehabilitation process. M. Obando also mentions the

aspect of counseling, more specifically family counseling.

Regarding psychological treatment within Casa Alianza, U. Herrera (personal communication,

September 27, 2013) highlights the importance of separating the youngster from their gang, as

youngsters “in gangs are much more violent than alone”.81

I. Pereyra describes the process of

depersonalization, which makes it easier for a person to commit a crime, without feeling any

emotions of regret or guilt. According to him, this aspect of depersonalization needs to be

handled.

80

“Entrevistador: ¿Y qué tal la religión, como la iglesia cristiana o católica? ¿Qué es su opinión sobre eso?

Entrevistado: No es una solución. Es una respuesta parcial. En mi mejor momento de trabajo social con maras y

pandillas, yo articule a la religión como parte de modela de respuesta. Y no tanto por la inspiración teológica, no.

Sino por la dinámica de los grupos religiosos, porque son dinámicos.” (E. Bardales, personal communication,

August 22, 2013) 81

“en pandillas en maras, son mucho más violentos que solos” (U. Herrera, personal communication, September 27,

2013).

66

On the other hand, U. Herrera also stresses the importance of working with the group and the

community as a whole, as isolated interventions are less effective than collective interventions.

A. Rodriguez is also more critical towards the focus on psychological treatment of gang

members. In his opinion, by focusing on the psychological aspect, we forget that the problem of

gang membership is a social and not an individual problem. Thus it needs to be handles in a

collective, a public way, and not in an individual way.

According to our respondents, working on one’s self-esteem is an important aspect of the

reintegration process. The youngsters, coming to Casa Alianza, often have a negative self-esteem

or have the feeling they need to be feared, by conducting violent acts, in order to be respected. G.

Ruelas (personal communication, September 27, 2013) states that the youngsters “are not visible

within their communities, they are anonymous, they are instruments of violence, nothing more.

Over here they become visible. So they encounter opportunities to be someone, to be recognized,

to be respected, though not being feared.”82

M. Flores described a specific approach of psychological treatment which they use in Proyecto

Victoria: psychological deprogramming. Psychological deprogramming includes trying to

change the psychological mindset of ex-gang members, by working on their self-esteem and

teaching them new values. Those new values include: respect (also towards those who think

differently), tolerance, comprehension, patience, self-control, mutual love between human

beings, respect to the law and authorities, and also religious (Christian) values. With respect to

working on their self-esteem, Proyecto Victoria tries to teach the youngsters that they are all

equal, wherever they come from, to whatever group they belong or whatever cloths they are

wearing.

The philosophy that we implement is a therapy within the therapeutic plan; changing the

way they think, is changing their way of living. They are internal within Project Victoria;

they stay for seven months or more. During that time of being within Project Victoria,

82

“en sus comunidades no son visibles, son anónimos, son instrumentos de violencia, nada más. Aquí se hacen

visibles. Entonces encuentran oportunidades de ser alguien, de ser reconocido, de ser respectados aunque no sean

temidos” (G. Ruelas, personal communication, September 27, 2013).

67

they are acquiring new habits, new values. (M. Flores, personal communication, August

29, 2013)83

4.3.4 Medical treatment

Some organizations, like Casa Alianza, provide general medical care for the youngsters of their

project. Proyecto Victoria and UNICEF also provide special care to drug addicts, in order to

overcome their drug addiction, and AJH-USAID financially supported FUNDASALVA, which

is a rehabilitation project for drug addicts (in El Salvador). Also M. Obando (personal

communication, August 28, 2013) confirms that: “… there should be a rehabilitation program

which takes into consideration [drug – EVD] consumption and addictions, but also a serious

effort to get him out of the gang.84

Besides general and drug related care, some organizations, like PNPRRS and UNICEF, also

focus on the removal of tattoos. M. Obando perceives the removal of tattoos as an ultimate step

in the process of rehabilitation, which functions as a step towards the process of reintegration.

… That is where the program of the removal of tattoos operates, because it is like the

final phase. The boy has demonstrated that he is going through his rehabilitation

program, he starts removing his tattoos and he reaches the third step which is the social

reinsertion program. (M. Obando, personal communication, August 28, 2013)85

On the other hand, M. Obanda is also critical regarding the removal of tattoos in order to be able

to reintegrate into society. She argues that society should be more tolerant towards people with

tattoos. Academics, like A. Rodriguez, O. Lopez and I. Pereyra, follow her opinion and state that

the stigmatizing effect of tattoos is due to the close-minded attitude of the people; more

specifically the close-minded attitude of employers who do not want to employ an (alleged) (ex)

83

“La filosofía que nosotros ponemos, es una terapia dentro del plan terapéutico; cambian su manera de pensar,

cambiar su manera de vivir. Ellos están interno dentro del Proyecto Victoria; están siete meses hasta más. En este

tiempo de estar dentro de Proyecto Victoria, están adquiriendo nuevos hábitos, nuevos valores.” (M. Flores,

personal communication, August 29, 2013) 84

“… tiene que haber un programa de rehabilitación en lo que se refiera al consumo y lo que refiera adicciones,

pero también un seria de esfuerzos de sacarlo de la pandilla.” (M. Obando, personal communication, August 28,

2013). 85

“… allí donde funcione el programa de borrarles los tatuajes, porque es como la última etapa. El muchacho ha

demostrado que esta yendo su programa de rehabilitación, empieza borrarse sus tatuajes y llega al tercer paso que

es el programa de reinserción social.” (M. Obando, personal communication, August 28, 2013)

68

gang member. The academics would even recommend not removing the tattoo, as a visible scar

will always remind others that the person once had a tattoo and thus, in their opinion, once

formed part of a gang.

It leaves behind scars and that was a mark. So, we created a conclusion in our study: the

society is the one who has the tattoo. The social tattoo is there, it is on the other side;

because they do not allow the reintegration process of youngsters. (A. Rodriguez,

personal communication, August 26, 2013)86

4.3.5 Vocational training and employment

Vocational training includes trainings or workshops in interpersonal skills and employment

opportunities. All our respondents, working for an NGO, stress the importance of vocational

training within the reintegration process. M. Obando points out to an agreement of INFOP

(Instituto Nacional de Formación Professional) with PNPRRS and CETSPN (Comisión Especial

de Transición del Sistema Penitenciario Nacional) on professional trainings for (ex-) gang

members.87

Though M. Obando (personal communication, August 28, 2013) perceives this

project as “uno miso incide en toda esta situación de identificación, de peyorativa y de

discriminación social que hay”, along with E. Bardales, U. Herrera and G. Ruelas, she agrees

upon the fact that youngsters should encounter a vocational training that fits them and should be

encouraged and supported to complete their formation, in order to achieve a stronger position on

the labor market.

According to E. Bardales and M. Obando, commercial skills, of how to administrate a business,

should be incorporated in the vocational training. Also the ability of setting up a micro enterprise

can facilitate a youngster in his or her reintegration process, as employers or governmental

institutions are not always eager to employ ex-gang members, as said by C. Díaz, M. Obando

and G. Ruelas. C. Díaz outlined an example, of what she witnessed in El Salvador, of how a

group of religious people supported gang members in their process of reintegration:

86

“Quedan cicatrizas y esa era una marca. Entonces, en nuestro estudio creamos una conclusión: el tatuaje lo tiene

la sociedad. El tatuaje social está allí, está en el otro lado. Porque no permiten el proceso de reinserción de los

jóvenes.” (A. Rodriguez, personal communication, August 26, 2013) 87

For more information on this project, see website of INFOP Honduras:

http://www.infop.hn/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=518:infop-pnprrs-y-cetspn-firman-

convenio-de-cooperacion-para-contribuir-al-mejoramiento-de-las-condiciones-de-vida-de-los-jovenes-privados-de-

libertad&catid=43:noticias-institucionales&Itemid=61

69

They grabbed all the gang members that were willing to leave and created a macro

workshop. They have carpentry, they have welding, they have – so, they create

microenterprises right there. For example, the ministry of education of El Salvador tells

them “we need 2000 school desks, you [can – EVD] make them”. So they make 2000

school desks, they buy the materials and they distribute the profits among all the

partners. So over there it is working a lot. (C. Díaz, personal communication, August 28,

2013)88

S. Stadthagen also mentioned a project of AJH-USAID; which was a reintegration program with

ex-gang members, trying to reintegrate into society by creating their own micro enterprise. The

whole process was filmed and exposed on television as a reality show: “Challenge X” (with 10

ex-gang members),89

and later on “Challenge 100” (with 100 ex-gang members).90

When

Challenge 100 took place in San Pedro Sula, AJH-USAID was able to integrate more than 40 ex-

gang members in the public labor market. The idea of converting the program into a reality show

was mainly to raise awareness among society in giving ex-gang members a second chance.

All our respondents agreed upon the fact that in order for one’s reintegration process into society

to work, employment and earning a decent income is an important asset. If the latter is not

fulfilled, youngsters will be tempted to go back to their gang, where it was much easier to earn a

lot of money within a small amount of time. Most respondents stated that the government should

play a leading role in creating employment opportunities.

Interviewer: So, the role of the government is to create opportunities?

Interviewee: Yes, of course the responsibility is there. The state must promote the opportunities.

The state is the one who needs to generate processes of – i.e., as the rights of youngsters;

employment is a right. (A. Rodriguez, personal communication, August 26, 2013)91

88

“Ellos agarraron a todos los mareros que querían salir y crear un macro taller. Tienen carpintería, tienen

soldadura, tienen – entonces, ellos allí mismo crean microempresas. Por ejemplo, el ministerio de educación de El

Salvador les dice “necesitamos 2000 pupitres, háganlos ustedes”. Entonces ellos hacen 2000 pupitres, compran los

materiales y las ganancias se distribuyen entre todos los socios. Entonces allí está funcionando mucho eso.” (C.

Díaz, personal communication, August 28, 2013). 89

“Desafio X” (S. Stadthagen, personal communication, August 29, 2013) 90

“Desafio 100” (S. Stadthagen, personal communication, August 29, 2013) 91

“Entrevistador: Entonces, ¿el papel del gobierno es crear oportunidades?

70

Finally, we would like to conclude this section by saying that some of our respondents said that

all the above mentioned rehabilitation and reintegration aspects should be incorporated into one

holistic approach, in order to be able to tackle the problem of gang membership by focusing

simultaneously on its different characteristics.

5. Discussion

In this section we discuss the results, followed by the limitations of this research and

recommendations for further investigation.

5.1 Discussion of results

In this section we discuss the results of our research in comparison with the literature. In order to

understand the process of reintegration into society, we first of all discuss why youngsters join a

gang. Secondly, we discuss the reasons for a gang member to leave the gang. Thirdly, we take a

look at the different aspects of the reintegration process of (ex-) gang members.

Before discussing the reasons for youngsters to join a gang, we need to clarify the presence of

gang members within society. It is not an ‘us’ versus ‘them’ story, as gangs are present in all big

(and even small) cities in Honduras. With more or less 35.000 gang members in the country

(USAID, 2012), 80% of them living in the two biggest cities (Tegucigalpa and San Pedro Sula),

it is not unlikely to come in contact with gang members. This implies that regardless of the

following factors, which might have an influence on whether or not a boy or girl will become a

gang member, children are confronted with the presence of gangs from a very young age

onwards, and they basically grow up in communities where one gang or another is present. The

latter implies that, as stated by Sutherland (1947), when youngsters find themselves in a place

where criminal behavior forms part of the social structure of that neighborhood, they are more

likely to become involved with the present delinquent groups.

Entrevistado: Si, claro que la responsabilidad esta acá. El estado debe promover las oportunidades. El estado es el

que debe generar procesos de – o sea, como los derechos de los jóvenes; el empleo es un derecho.” (A. Rodriguez,

personal communication, August 26, 2013)

71

As our data analysis revealed: the lack of socio-economic opportunities in Honduras, one’s

instable family and environmental situation, the willingness to belong, and the persuading factor

of gangs, can all contribute to the fact that a youngster joins a gang.

First of all, more than half of the children in Honduras grow up in poverty, often without a

father, and in an environment that lacks proper healthcare, education, recreational space, and

employment opportunities. Several researchers (Aplícano Cubero, 2012; Merino, 2004; Reisman,

2006; Santacruz Giralt, Concha-Eastman & Homies Unidos, 2001; Thornberry, 1998) confirm

that this is an ideal situation for the practices of gangs. O. Lopez and M. Obando stated that not

going to school forms a risk for gang involvement. Knowing that, according to M. Flores,

816.000 youngsters in Honduras are not going to school or working, and there are ‘only’ 35.000

gang members, one might wonder what happened to the other children and what made the

difference for them not to form part of a gang. Or, in the words of Matza (1964), how come that

some youngsters drift more towards criminal and other more towards norm conform behavior?

Secondly, many children in Honduras are raised by a single mother (up to 70% according to C.

Díaz) or grow up with the experience of domestic violence. The latter can have an influence on a

child’s vision towards problem solving. Though not all gang members come from poor families,

they most likely seek for emotional support within a gang, when this is lacking in their own

family (cf. Thrasher, 1963). This also reminds us of Hirschi’s (1969) and Reckless’ (1967)

control theory. When a youngster does not feel a strong attachment to his family or school or is

not influenced by this outer containment, he is more likely to get involved with nonconformist

activities. Howerver, we cannot state this is due to a child’s behavior; rather it is the

responsibility of the family and the school to keep a youngster occupied and involved, and

subsequently away from the streets (cf. Thrasher, 1963).

Thirdly, youngsters encounter, in a gang, a place where they can belong and develop their

identity. As a gang member you can exercise power, be respected and protected against external

violence. Also the PNPRRS (2011) and Reisman (2006) stated that youngsters are attracted to

gangs, because they can provide them with economic goods and give them a place in the group

to develop their social identity (cf. Shaw & McKay, 1969; Thrasher, 1927). Though we might

ask ourselves, as stated by I. Pereyra, why it is that some youngsters, in the course of developing

their identity, try to find their place within society by joining a gang? Should there be more

alternative youth movements in Honduras, like boy scouts? This, according to Thrasher (1963)

72

sometimes has the same structure or hierarchy as a gang, but with a positive attitude towards the

community and society.

Fourthly, youngsters, who are not interested in joining a gang in the first place, can, according to

some of our respondents, also be persuaded by their local ruling gang to perform a certain task,

and by doing so get even more involved with the gang. Though we need to mention that when

youngsters (who basically grew up with gang members living in their neighborhood) are asked to

perform a certain task (e.g. sell some marihuana to earn a bit of money), they do not immediately

link this act with forming part of a gang; as to form part of a gang, they need to go through an

initiation rite first. To some extent we could link this to Cohen’s (1955) subculture theory on

status frustration; as Cohen states that youngsters who want to achieve a certain social status (i.e.

having economic goods), but do not have the legal means to achieve it, will be tempted to use

illegal means in order to get what they want. On the other hand, we were not able to confirm

Cohen (1955) and Whyte’s (1937) distinction between a corner boy, a college boy and a

delinquent subculture - more research should be done regarding this aspect.

Though there are youngsters who want to leave their gang, it is not always easy to do so. We first

discuss the (personal) reasons to leave the gang, followed by the different ways to do so and the

related difficulties.

Our respondents gave several reasons why youngsters want to leave their gang. Firstly, they want

to leave as a consequence of the process of maturing. Secondly, they want to leave for the fear of

being assassinated by a rivaling gang, the police, someone from the community, or by one of

their fellow gang members. Thirdly, the gang member might be willing to leave his gang for

family reasons and/or when he encounters external opportunities.

First of all, as our respondents mentioned, at a certain age youngsters mature and realize that

what they are doing is not right. Moreover, they have had enough of all the violence. This

process of maturing is what Moffitt (1993) identified as adolescent limited antisocial behavior.92

More research should be done to find out at what age youngsters start to mature; thus at what age

youngsters will be more willing to leave their gang.

92

Moffitt (1993) developed an age-crime curve, whereby she demonstrates that most delinquency is committed at

the age of 17 and the amount of crime committed decreases severely by the age of 20 and even more by the age of

25.

73

Secondly, gang members want to leave the gang when they are aware of how life in a gang really

is in practice; i.e. committing crimes, such as robbery, murder, drug consumption, or suffering

from internal (by their own gang) and external (by other gangs or the police) violence (cf. Cruz,

2010; Merino, 2004). After committing all these crimes, gang members realize they have built up

a network of enemies and subsequently start to fear for their lives.

Thirdly, as stated by our respondents and confirmed by the literature (cf. Rodríguez Bolaños &

Sanabria León, 2007; Aplícano Cubero, 2012), youngsters are willing to leave their gang when

they are offered a job or educational opportunity (cf. Hirschi, 1969; Matza, 1964). Our

respondents also mentioned that when a gang member gets a child, he or she starts to think

differently and often does not want their child to grow up as a future gang member. Although

finding a job, going back to school or starting a family seems to be quite obvious reasons to

leave a gang, it is not always that simple. First of all, there is a great lack of employment

opportunities within the country and even if a gang member finds a job, he will most likely be

refused because of his history (cf. Aplícano Cubero, 2012; UNDP, n.d.). Some other difficulties

are discussed in the next part.

According to some of our respondents, there are only a few options to leaving the gang:

converting to religion, starting a family or dying (cf. Matza, 1964; Merino, 2004). Even when a

gang member wants to leave his gang to dedicate himself to the word of God, he always needs

the permission of the gang. Other ways of leaving the gang is by seeking refuge in an institution

(e.g. Casa Alianza or Proyecto Victoria) or even by fleeing the country. Though these options

cannot be seen in the light of reintegration, as in the first case (for example Proyecto Victoria)

ex-gang members often stay inside the rehabilitation center for a long time without going back to

their community (this for safety reasons), and in the second case ex-gang members literally move

to another city or another country in order to avoid reprisals.

While some youngsters, depending on their situation (cf. supra), are willing to leave their gang,

they are also aware of the dangers of doing so; one of them being, as we just mentioned, the risk

of reprisals by the gang (cf. Rodríguez Bolaños & Sanabria León, 2007; PNPRRS, 2011).

Although not every gang member has equal chances to leave his gang; for a Sympathizer,

Aspirant or Newbie it is easier to leave than for a Permanent Member or Leader (cf. Proyecto

Victoria, 2013). With this in mind, it might make sense to focus reintegration programs on the

specific needs of each category or to choose to only focus on the reintegration of Sympathizers,

74

Aspirants and Newbies. Another difficulty that a gang member is most likely to face when

leaving his gang is the issue of stigmatization by society (cf. Aplícano Cubero, 2012; Samayoa,

2011). This stigmatization is even more severe when the person has tattoos. Whether or not the

removal of tattoos can prevent an ex-gang member from further stigmatization; it is up to society

to become more aware of giving second chances to ex-gang members.

Until now we have only discussed reasons and methods to leave the gang. Though, some of our

respondents (e.g. E. Bardales) mentioned that leaving the gang is not always a good option (cf.

Rodríguez Bolaños & Sanabria León, 2007; Thrasher, 1963); they would rather opt for

preservation (i.e. giving a place within the community), though reformation, of the gang.

When leaving the gang, our respondents stated that the process of rehabilitation and reintegration

of young gang members into society should contain different aspects, and implement these

aspects simultaneously in a holistic approach (cf. Dowden & Andrews, 1999; Howell, 1998;

Thrasher, 1963).

First of all, as most of our respondents stated, the reintegration process should take place in the

local community of the youngster, including his family, educational training and religion (cf.

Andrews & Bonta, 2010; Merino, 2004; Shaw & McKay, 1969; Thrasher, 1963). The

relationship with the community, as well as with one’s family should be strengthened, in order to

ensure the local reintegration process (cf. Howell; Shaw & McKay, 1969). Also the educational

aspect of going to school and having access to extracurricular activities (e.g. the ‘Open School’

system), should keep youngsters occupied and away from the street (cf. Hirschi, 1969; Lipsey,

1995; Lipsey & Wilson, 1998; Thrasher, 1963). While Proyecto Victoria isolates the youngster

from his community, and does not have contact with the youngster’s school, Casa Alianza

emphasizes the importance of rehabilitating the youngster in his own environment. One might

wonder whether it would be useful to reintegrate an ex-gang member in the same environment

where he grew up, as it would include the same aspects which moved him towards the gang in

the first place. In this regard we might ask ourselves if we can speak of a culture of violence in

75

(certain parts of) Honduras,93

and if it would thus make sense at all to reincorporate a

rehabilitated ex-gang member in such an environment.

Secondly, psychological aspects should also be included in the reintegration process. Our

respondents agreed upon the fact that psychological treatment should be given individually as

well as within a group or family context. Though the literature confirms the effects of

psychological treatment, they are rather critical regarding the different psychological

intervention methods (cf. Lipsey, 1995; Lipsey & Wilson, 1998; Shaw & McKay, 1969). In line

with Merton’s (1938) strain theory and Reckless’ (1967) containment theory, we would

recommend psychological treatment to focus on the person’s self-control. The effectiveness of

the different kinds of psychological interventions should be investigated in future studies on the

rehabilitation and reintegration of gang members.

Thirdly, besides psychological, also medical aspects should be included in the reintegration

process. Our respondents highlighted the importance of medical treatment, from providing

general healthcare to specific attention for drug addicts and the removal of tattoos. General

medical attention can be an important asset for youngsters who have limited access to health care

within their community (cf. supra); though the effectiveness of the removal of tattoos was still

open for discussion (cf. Merino, 2004).

Fourthly, though there is some disagreement among academic researchers whether vocational

training aspects should be included in the reintegration process or not (cf. Dowden & Andrews,

1999; Lipsey, 1995; Lipsey & Wilson, 1998). According to our respondents it should. A future

study, regarding this aspect, should investigate which vocational skills are most useful for ex-

gang members who want to reintegrate into society. From this study we remember that

vocational skills, which focus on employment, micro enterprises and commercial or

administrative business skills, can facilitate the reinsertion process on the labor market.

Following the discussion of our results in relation to known criminological theories and other

literature; we would like to conclude by singling out one theoretical approach which in our

opinion is most related to the phenomenon of youth gang members and their reintegration into

society, namely, the approach of labeling theories. We consider this approach to be related to the

93

We can find some factors referring to a culture of violence, as described by Waldmann (2007) on the case of

Colombia, which are similar to the case of Honduras; e.g.: high homicide rates, a culture of machismo and revenge,

a lack of state monopoly of violence, ineffectiveness of the rule of law, dominance of drug cartels, etc.

76

specific situation of maras and pandillas in Honduras for the following reasons. First of all,

when Ricardo Maduro implemented the so-called Anti-gang law, he created a platform whereby

it was possible for police officers to arrest and detain youngsters who were (often allegedly)

being suspected to form part of a gang (cf. Carranza, 2006). According to our respondents and

confirmed by the literature (Aplícano Cubero, 2012; Samayoa, 2011), due to this Anti-gang law

many youngsters were being stigmatized by their looks, economic situation and area where they

lived; to state it with the words of Becker (1963), those youngsters were labeled as outsiders.

Secondly, as Lemert (1951) argued in his theory on primary and secondary deviation, or before

him Tannenbaum (1938) with his theory on dramatization of the evil, the disapproving reactions

of the government, the media and subsequently the community on primary deviant behavior,

fostered further secondary deviant behavior, as the youngster has the feeling he is already pushed

into a certain category. The latter is particularly important regarding this research, as our

respondents repeatedly mentioned that the Honduran society is very stigmatizing towards

youngsters with a history of gang membership, especially towards those with tattoos;

subsequently they are not eager in giving second chances. In order to avoid these processes of

stigmatization, outsiders should be relabeled as insiders, and they should be given a space within

society (cf. E. Bardales).

5.2 Limitations of research and recommendations for further investigation

From the aspects we discussed in the previous part, we would like to make some

recommendations and also highlight the limitations of this research. We will first discuss the

limitations and subsequently give some recommendations regarding practice, policy and further

research.

This dissertation has several limitations. First of all, during our research, no gang members or ex-

gang members as such were interviewed. If we really want to get a better insight into the

reintegration process of gang members, we should be able to work on primary data and thus

include the youngsters in the investigation. Secondly, as we already mentioned in our discussion,

we were not able to identify the reasons for certain youngsters to join a gang, for others to join a

barra, and others to be involved with a non-violent peer group; even though they all grow up in

the same area, experiencing the same living conditions. This should be further investigated.

Thirdly, we were not able to identify the specific needs related to the different levels of gang

77

membership (Aspirant, Sympathizer, Newbie, Permanent member, Leader). More research

regarding the need principle is necessary.

As we discussed in the previous section, the process of rehabilitation/reintegration should be

adapted to the specific needs of a youngster. We could first make a distinction between the

different levels of gang membership; we would even recommend practitioners only to focus on

the lowest ranks (Aspirant, Sympathizer and Newbie), as they have a much higher chance to

successfully leave their gang and reintegrate into society. Subsequently, special attention should

be given to the person’s reintegration possibilities within society. Can he go back to his family or

is it better to live separately? Can he go back to his community or should he be relocated to

another community (or, for that matter, another country)? Can he resume his studies or start

working? When taking these factors into account, more targeted intervention methods can be

applied.

With regard to governmental and legislative policies, we would recommend to invest more in

preventive, rehabilitative and reintegrative interventions. The eponymous legislation can be used

for this. In response to the results from the interviews and literature on the National Prevention,

Rehabilitation and Reintegration Program, we would like to recommend to the Honduran

government to evaluate this project and to provide more resources if this would be required. In

conjunction thereto, we would suggest starting up some pilot projects, focusing on different

reintegration aspects (e.g. psychological and medical assistance, vocational skills, etc.). Also, as

our respondents mentioned, more free or inexpensive drug rehabilitation centers should be

installed by the government, as these are currently rather expensive or overcrowded. In addition

we would like to encourage more initiatives which aim at providing more opportunities for

youngsters (cf. President Juan Orlando’s ‘Better Living with Chambas’ program). Finally, we

would like to stress that Anti-gang legislations, which were implemented by a previous

government, along with its consequences, should by all means be prevented in the future.

Regarding further investigation, we could make the following suggestions. First of all, while

focusing on gang members in general, we did not distinguish between male and female members.

We briefly highlighted the different roles of men and women within a gang, but it could be of

interest to elaborate more on this issue. Secondly, the focus of this dissertation was on the

78

reintegration of maras and pandillas in Honduras. No distinction was made between the different

gangs. This could be another recommendation for further research; i.e. to investigate the

difference between the Mara Salvatrucha and the Barrio 18. By investigating the differences,

and also the similarities, between those two gangs, we could have a better view on the

potentiality of a truce, which was initiated by Bishop Rómulu Emiliani. Subsequently, we could

elaborate more on the differences and similarities of the MS and 18 in Honduras and the rest of

Central America and even in the United States, where those gangs are active. Finally, while we

focused on extramural reintegration methods, it could be of interest to investigate which

rehabilitation and reintegration methods within an intramural setting, i.e. within jail or other

closed centers, are most effective.

6. Conclusion

The purpose of this research was to find an answer to the question: ‘How can the reintegration of

young gang members into society best be facilitated?’ In order to respond this research question,

two sub-questions were investigated:

1. For which reasons can young gang members leave the gang?

2. Which intervention methods can facilitate young gang members in their process of

leaving the gang and reintegrate in society?

We used 14 qualitative semi-open interviews with stakeholders, living in Honduras, to research

this subject.

Regarding our first sub-question, we can state that there are several reasons for gang members to

leave their gang. Those reasons are: the fear of being assassinated by a rivaling gang or to die

within the gang; the family of the gang member who wants him to leave the gang; and

encountering a better alternative of living (e.g. formal education or a legal job). These are some

push and pull factors for gang members to leave their gang, but actually doing so is not that

obvious. According to most of our respondents, a gang member can only leave his gang if he

converts to religion (and goes to church on a daily basis) or when he dies. The options to leave

the gang are scarce and there is always the risk of reprisals by the gang. When a gang member

leaves his gang, for one of the reasons mentioned above, he is followed up by his gang for one to

79

two years. If he trespasses one of the conditions for leaving the gang (e.g. if he stops going to

church or commits a crime), the gang gives him ‘green light’ (luz verde), which means they kill

him for the mistake he made.

Regarding our second sub-question, we can state that the process of reintegration of young gang

members into society can best be facilitated when it contains different intervention aspects,

which are simultaneously implemented in a holistic approach. This research highlights the

importance of making a distinction between the different levels of gang membership;

rehabilitation and reintegration interventions should focus on the Sympathizers, Aspirants and

Newbie’s. The reintegration process should take place in the local community of the youngster,

if possible. Otherwise, the youngster should be relocated to another community. During the

process, the youngster’s family and school or educational formation should be incorporated. The

reintegration process should also contain psychological aspects, focusing on one’s self-esteem

and the youngster must be provided with the required medical treatment. Ex-gang members, who

tattooed themselves, should also get the opportunity to remove their tattoos, as (mostly visible)

tattoos have a stigmatizing effect regarding one’s chances on the job market. Finally, our

respondents also stated vocational training aspects should be included in the youngster’s

reintegration process, though the literature is more critical towards this aspect.

80

Bibliography

ADE (2011). Evaluation of the European Commission’s co-operation with Honduras. Rome,

Italy: ADE.

Afonso, C., Cardoso, K., Santos, R., Roque, R., & Moura, T. (2012). Youth and urban violence

in San Salvador, Rio de Janeiro and Praia: public policies, community-based responses and

recommendations. Peace Studies Group.

Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency.

Criminology, 30(1), 47-87.

Andrews, D. (1995). The psychology of criminal conduct and effective treatment. In J. McGuire

(Ed.), What works: reducing reoffending (pp. 35-62). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.

Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2006). The psychology of criminal conduct (4th

ed.). New

Providence, New Jersey: LexisNexis Group.

Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct (5th

ed.). New

Providence, New Jersey: LexisNexis Group.

Aplícano Cubero, A. (2012). Relato de vida de una expandillera de Honduras. In M. Ávalos

Quispal (Ed.), Historias y relatos de vida de pandilleros y ex pandilleros de Guatemala, El

Salvador y Honduras: Inicio de diálogo desde su realidad y percepciones (pp. 287-321).

Guatemala: Insituto de Estudios Comparados en Ciencias Penales de Guatemala.

Becker, H. (1963). Outsiders: studies in the sociology of deviance. New York: Free Press.

Beyens, K., & Tournel, H. (2010). Mijnwerkers of ontdekkingsreizigers? Het kwalitatieve

interview. In T. Decorte & D. Zaitch (Eds.), Kwalitatieve methoden en technieken in de

criminologie (pp. 200-232). Leuven: Acco.

Burgess, E. W. (1926). The urban community. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Burgess, R. L., & Akers, R. L. (1966). A differential association-reinforcement theory of

criminal behavior. Social Problems, 14(2), 128-147.

81

Cálix, Á. (2010). Honduras: de la crisis política al surgimiento de un nuevo actor social. Nueva

Sociedad, 226, 34-51.

CAP (n.d.). Chicago Area Project: Strengthening neighborhoods – helping young people.

Retrieved on June 28, 2014, from http://www.chicagoareaproject.org/

Carranza, M. (2006). Del asistencialismo a la incidencia y el cabildeo: las diversas respuestas de

la sociedad civil organizada al fenómeno de las pandillas en Honduras. In J. M. Cruz (Ed.),

Maras y pandillas en Centroamérica: las respuestas de la sociedad civil organizada (Volumen

IV) (pp. 235-328). San Salvador: UCA.

Centinela Económico (2013). Lobo alaba tregua entre maras promovida por obispo Emiliani y

embajador Blackwell. Retrieved June 30, 2014, from

http://www.centinelaeconomico.com/2013/05/27/lobo-alaba-tregua-entre-maras-promovida-por-

obispo-emiliani-y-embajador-blackwell/

Cloward, R. A., & Ohlin, L. E. (1960). Delinquency and opportunity. In J. E. Jacoby (Ed.),

Classics of Criminology (pp. 236-240). Illinois: Waveland Press.

Cohen, A. K. (1955). Delinquent boys: the culture of the gang. Glenceo: The Free Press.

Cruz, J. M. (2010). Central American maras: from youth street gangs to transnational protection

rackets. Global Crime, 11(4), 379-398.

Cruz, J. M., & Macías, R. C. (2004). The political culture of democracy in Honduras, 2004.

Nashville: Latin American Public Opinion Project (LAPOP), Vanderbilt University.

Decorte, T. (2010). Kwalitatieve data-analyse in het criminologisch onderzoek. In T. Decorte &

D. Zaitch (Eds.), Kwalitatieve methoden en technieken in de criminologie (pp. 441-472). Leuven:

Acco.

Decorte, T. (2010). Software voor kwalitatieve dataverwerking. In T. Decorte & D. Zaitch

(Eds.), Kwalitatieve methoden en technieken in de criminologie (pp. 473-488). Leuven: Acco.

Dowden, C., & Andrews, D. A. (1999). What works in young offender treatment: a meta-

analysis. Forum on Corrections Research, 11, 21-24.

82

Durán Chavarría, D. (2012). Prevención de la violencia juvenil y fortalecimiento del sistema de

justicia penal juvenil. San José: ILANUD.

El Heraldo (2012). Lanzan programa Honduras por la vida. Retrieved June 30, 2014, from

http://www.elheraldo.hn/csp/mediapool/sites/ElHeraldo/Pais/story.csp?cid=573167&sid=299&fi

d=214

Floresi, H., Mejía, J., Mejía, J. A., SJ, I. M., & Serrano, O. (2004). Políticas juveniles y

rehabilitación de mareros en Honduras. In ERIC, DIRINPRO, NITLAPÁN, IDIES, & IUDOP

(Ed.), Maras y pandillas en Centroamérica: vol. III. políticas juveniles y rehabilitación (pp. 187-

292). Managua, El Salvador: UCA Publicaciones.

Goethals, J. (2007). Psychologie en delinquentie: een inleiding in de criminologische

pscyhologie. Leuven: ACCO.

Gobierno de la República de Honduras (2014). Juan Orlando Hernández – presidente de la

república de Honduras: plan de todos para una vida mejor. Retrieved June 30, 2014, from

http://www.presidencia.gob.hn/

Hayward, K. (2004). Crime, consumer culture and the urban experience. In K. Hayward (Ed.),

City limits: crime, consumer culture and the urban experience (pp. 147-173). London:

Grasshouse.

Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. California: University of California Press.

Honduran gangs Salvatrucha and 18 Street announce truce. Retrieved on April 24, 2014, from

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-22694989

Howell, J. C. (1998). Promising programs for youth gang violence prevention and intervention.

In R. Loeber, & D. P. Farrington (Eds.), Serious & violent juvenile offenders (pp. 284-312).

Howland, S. E. (2014). Migra y Maras: the relationship between the proliferation of Central

American street gangs and migratory patterns in the northern triangle, Mexico, and the United

States. Washington, DC: Georgetown University.

83

Interpeace (2013). Violentas y violentadas: relaciones de género en las maras Salvatrucha y

Barrio 18 del triángulo norte de Centroamérica. Guatemala: Interpeace Regional Office for

Latin America.

IUDOP (2010). “Seconds in the Air”: women gang-members and their prisons. San Salvador:

UCA.

IUDOP (2012). Encuesta de evaluación del año 2012. San Salvador: Universidad

Centroamericana José Simeón Cañas.

J. (2013, November 25). Honduras election results – Juan Orlando Hernández the winner.

Retrieved December 6, 2013, from http://www.honduras.com/honduras-election-results-juan-

orlando-hernandez-won/

Katz, J. & Jackson-Jacobs, C. (2004). The criminologists’ gang. In C. Summer (Ed.), Blackwell

Companion to Criminology (pp. 91-124). London: Blackwell.

Kobrin, S. (1959). The Chicago Area Project – a 25-year assessment. Annals of the American

Academy of Political and Social Science, 322, 19-29.

Lemert, E. M. (1951). Social pathology. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Lipsey, M. W. (1995). What do we learn from 400 research studies on the effectiveness of

treatment with juvenile delinquents? In J. McGuire (Ed.), What Works: Reducing Reoffending

(pp. 63-78). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.

Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (1998). Effective intervention for serious juvenile offenders: a

synthesis of research. In R. Loeber, & D. P. Farrington (Eds.), Serious & Violent Juvenile

Offenders (pp. 313-345).

Llanos, M., & Marsteintredet, L. (2010). Ruptura y continuidad: la caída de “Mel” Zelaya en

perspectiva comparada. América Latina Hoy, 55, 173-197.

84

Maesschalck, J. (2010). Methodologische kwaliteit in het kwalitatief criminologisch onderzoek.

In T. Decorte & D. Zaitch (Eds.), Kwalitatieve methoden en technieken in de criminologie (pp.

119-145). Leuven: Acco.

Matza, D. (1964). Delinquency and drift. New York: Wiley.

Merino, J. M. (2004). Políticas juveniles y rehabilitación de mareros en Guatemala. In ERIC,

DIRINPRO, NITLAPÁN, IDIES, & IUDOP (Ed.), Maras y pandillas en Centroamérica: vol. III.

políticas juveniles y rehabilitación (pp. 89-186). Managua, El Salvador: UCA Publicaciones.

Merton, R. K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review, 3, 672-682.

Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: a

developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100(4), 674-701.

Mortelmans, D. (2010). Het kwalitatief onderzoeksdesign. In T. Decorte & D. Zaitch (Eds.),

Kwalitatieve methoden en technieken in de criminologie (pp. 75-118). Leuven: Acco.

Obama zoekt meer geld in crisis met piepjonge immigranten. (2014, 30 juni). De Standaard.

Retrieved July 1, 2014, from http://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf20140629_01160932

Omar, J. (2013, August 21). Honduras elections 2013 – the campaign officially begins. Retrieved

December 6, 2013, from http://www.honduras.com/honduras-elections-2013-the-campaign-

officially-begins/

Posada, M. G., & López, M. (1993). El Salvador 1950-1970: latifundios, integración y crisis.

Revista de Historia de América, 115, 37-62.

PRB (n.d.). Honduras: highlights. (n.d.). Retrieved November 4, 2013, from Population

Reference Bureau website: http://www.prb.org/DataFinder/Geography/Data.aspx?loc=319

Programa Nacional de Prevención, rehabilitación y reinserción social, (2011). Situación de

maras y pandillas en Honduras. Tegucigalpa, Honduras.

Proyecto Victoria (2013). Maras y Pandillas: sinónimo de violencia, dolor y muerte.

Tegucigalpa: Proyecto Victoria.

85

Reckless, W. C. (1967). The crime problem. New York: Meredith Publishing Company.

Reed, W. L., & Decker, S. H. (2002). Responding to gangs: evaluation and research.

Pennsylvania: Diane Publishing Co.

Reisman, L. (2006). Breaking the vicious cycle: responding to Central American youth gang

violence. SAIS Review, 26(2), 147-152.

Rodgers, D., Muggah, R., & Stevenson, C. (2009). Gangs of Central America: causes, costs, and

interventions. Geneva: Small Arms Survey, Graduate Institute of International and Development

Studies.

Rodríguez Bolaños, J. A., Sanabria, L. (2007). Maras y pandillas, comunidad y policía en

Centroamérica. San José: DEMOSCOPÍA S.A.

Rubio, M. (2002). La violencia en honduras y la región del valle de Sula. Washington, D.C.:

Deartamento Regional de Operaciones II.

Samayoa, C. V. (2011). Ejecuciones extrajudiciales de jóvenes estigmatizados en

Centroamérica: estudio de situación de Guatemala, El Salvador y Honduras, 2009. Guatemala.

Santacruz Giralt, M. L., Concha-Eastman, A. & Homies Unidos (2001). Barrio adentro: la

solidaridad violenta de las pandillas. San Salvador: Instituto Universitario de Opinión Pública.

Secretaría de Finanzas (2013). Presupuesto ciudadano. Ejercicio Fiscal 2013. Honduras:

Secretaria de Finanzas.

Shaw, C. R. and McKay, H. D. (1969). Juvenile delinquency and urban areas: a study of rates of

delinquency in relation to differential characteristics of local communities in American cities.

Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Siegel, L. J. (2000). Social process theories. In L. J. Siegel (Ed.), Criminology (pp. 220-253).

Belmont, California: Wadsworth.

Silverman, D. (2013). Doing qualitative research (5th

ed.). Sage.

86

Sutherland, E. H. (1947). Differential association. In J. E. Jacoby (Ed.), Classics of Criminology

(pp. 225-227). Illinois: Waveland Press.

Tannenbaum, F. (1938). Crime and the community. Boston: Ginn.

The World Bank (n.d.). GNI per capita, PPP (current international $) (n.d.). Retrieved

December 6, 2013, from The World Bank website:

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GNP.PCAP.PP.CD

Thornberry, T. P. (1998). Membership in youth gangs and involvement in serious and violent

offending. In R. Loeber, & D. P. Farrington (Eds.), Serious & Violent Juvenile Offenders (pp.

147-166).

Thrasher, F. M. (1927). The gang: a study of 1,313 gangs in Chicago. Chicago: The University

of Chicago Press.

Thrasher, F. M. (1963). The gang: a study of 1,313 gangs in Chicago. Chicago: The University

of Chicago Press.

UNAH-IUDPAS (2013). Observatorio de la violencia: boletín enero-diciembre 2012 (Edición

No. 28, Enero 2013). Tegucigalpa: Instituto Universitario de Democracia, Paz y Seguridad.

UNDP (n.d.). Honduras en breve. (n.d.). Retrieved November 4, 2013, from UNDP Honduras

website: http://www.hn.undp.org/content/honduras/es/home/countryinfo/

UNESCO (2011). Global education digest 2011: comparing education statistics across the

world. Quebec: UNESCO Institute for Statistics.

UNESCO (2012). Global Education digest 2012. Quebec: UNESCO Institute for Statistics.

UNICEF (2003). Censo de niñez en situación de calle: Resultados. Honduras: UNICEF.

UNODC (2011). Global study on homicide 2011. Vienna: United Nations Office on Drugs and

Crime.

87

UNODC (2012). Transnational organized crime in Central America and the Caribbean: a threat

assessment. Vienna: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.

UNODC (2013). Global study on homicide 2013. Vienna: United Nations Office on Drugs and

Crime.

USAID (2012). Snapshot: deconstructing gang structures & operations. Washington, DC: U.S.

Agency for International Development.

Vander Laenen, F. (2010). Focusgroepen. In T. Decorte & D. Zaitch (Eds.), Kwalitatieve

methoden en technieken in de criminologie (pp. 233-260). Leuven: Acco.

Waldmann, P. (2007). Is there a culture of violence in colombia? Terrorism and Political

Violence, 19(4), 593-609.

Weerman, F.M., Maxson, C.L., Esbensen, F., Aldridge, J., Medina, J., & van Gemert, F. (2009).

Eurogang program manual background, development, and use of the eurogang instruments in

multi-site, multi-method comparative research. Retrieved on March 31, 2014, from

http://www.umsl.edu/ccj/eurogang/EurogangManual.pdf

Wells, M. (2013). Teen gang fighting Honduras Maras for extortion profits. InSight Crime.

Retrieved on July 28, 2014, from http://www.insightcrime.org/news-briefs/teenage-gang-

fighting-honduras-maras-extortion

Whyte, W. F. (1937). Street corner society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Wood, J. and Alleyne, E. (2010). Street gang theory and research: where are we now and where

do we go from here? Aggression and Violent Behavior, 15, 100-111.

88

Annexes

Annex 1: Principles of effective prevention and correctional treatment

through direct service (Andrews, 1995)

89

Annex 2: Cuestionario de entrevista (original version topic list)

General

¿Cómo usted/su organización entra en contacto con pandilleros?

¿Cómo es el trabajo de usted/su organización relacionada con pandilleros/mareros?

Prevención

¿Cómo usted/su organización motiva a los jóvenes a no formar parte de una pandilla?

La vida pandillera

¿Cómo/por qué jóvenes se involucran en pandillas?

¿Qué es lo que atraen a los jóvenes a unirse en una pandilla?

Dejar la pandilla

¿Cuál es la mayor motivación para los jóvenes para abandonar la pandilla?

¿Cuál es el mayor obstáculo para los pandilleros que quieren salir de la pandilla?

¿Cómo usted/su organización motiva a los jóvenes para abandonar la pandilla?

Reintegración/rehabilitación

¿Buenas prácticas?

¿Malas prácticas/errores del pasado?

¿Que todavía está en necesidad, con respecto al futuro?

¿Cómo la religión ayuda a reintegrar (ex) pandilleros en la sociedad?

(¿Cuál es la función del gobierno en cuanto a la reintegración de los pandilleros? / ¿Cuál

podría ser la función del gobierno o cómo podría el gobierno ayudar más?)

(¿Usted/su organización recibe ningún apoyo de otras organizaciones, ONG o del

gobierno?)

Cambio de vida duradera

¿Cómo se previene ex mareros de volver a caer en los viejos hábitos?

¿Usted/su organización toma en cuenta la situación de la familia y la escuela o la

situación laboral? (visión holística)

90

Annex 3: Topic list (English version)

General

How do you/your organization get in contact with pandilleros?

How is the work of your organization related to pandilleros/mareros?

Prevention

How do you/your organization motivates youngsters not to become part of a gang?

Gang life

How/why do youngsters get involved in gangs?

What is it that youngsters attract to join a gang?

Leaving the gang

What is the greatest motivation for youngsters to leave the gang?

What is the biggest obstacle for pandilleros who want to leave the gang?

How do you/your organization motivates youngsters to leave a gang?

Reintegration/rehabilitation

Good practices?

Bad practices/mistakes from the past?

Which is still in need, regarding the future?

How does religion help to reintegrate (ex-) pandilleros into society?

(What is the role of the government, regarding the reintegration of gang members? /

What could be the role of the government or how could the government help more?)

(Do you/your organization receive any support from other organizations, NGO’s or from

the government?)

Durable life change

How do you prevent ex-mareros from falling back into old habits?

Do you/your organization take into account the family situation and school/work

situation? (holistic view)

91

Annex 4: Coding tree

Contact with gang members

Direct contact with gang members

Indirect contact with gang members

Funtioning of the organization

Goals of the organization

Achievements of the organization

Work of the academic

Work of the social worker

Prevention

Prevention measurements of the organization

Prevention advize from academic research

Motives for youngsters to not join a gang

Gang life

(Personal) motives to join a gang

Attractive image of the gang

Gang rituals

Gang activities

Leaving the gang

Motives to leave the gang

Obstacles

Reasons to stay in the gang

Reintegration

Good practices

Good practices of self

Good practices of other

Bad practices

Bad practices of self

Bad practices of other

Needs for the future

Needs from the government

92

Financial needs from the government

Political needs from the government

Needs from the people/society

Needs from other (international organizations)

Importance of religion

Durable live change

Aspects necessary for a durable live change

Reasons for return to the gang

93

Annex 5: List of respondents

Interview

number

Date of

interview

Name of

respondent

Organization/profession

of respondent

Interview

modality

Duration

of

interview

1 August 22,

2013

(Anonymous) NGO, working with youth

(including gang members)

Taped 33min

2 August 22,

2013

Douglas

Urbina

Project Officer, PNPRRS Taped 1h10min

3 August 22,

2013

Ernesto

Bardales

Sociologist Taped 1h10min

4 August 23,

2013

(Anonymous) Pastor, working with

imprisoned gang members

Taped 55min

5 August 23,

2013

Clarissa Nuñez Sociologist, UNAH Written

notes

±30min

6 August 26,

2013

Arnaldo

Rodriguez

Researcher, UNAH Taped 43min

7 August 26,

2013

Osman Lopez Researcher, UNAH Taped 56min

8 August 27,

2013

Isai Pereyra Psychologist, currently

working in an international

organization

Taped 1h06min

9 August 28,

2013

Carol Díaz Psychology Professor,

UNAH

Taped 31min

10 August 28,

2013

Marta Obando Specialist in children’s

rights, UNICEF

Taped 1h06min

11 August 29,

2013

Salvador

Stadthagen,

Jorge Reyes,

Fabricio

Hernández

Chief of Party AJH-

USAID, Grants &

Contracts Manager AJH-

USAID, Official Project

Coordinator AJH-USAID

Taped 1h06min

94

12 August 29,

2013

Melvis Flores Coordinator of Proyecto

Victoria

Taped 56min

13 August 30,

2013

(Anonymous) Community Police Taped 29min

26 September

27, 2013

Guadalupe

Ruelas, Ubaldo

Herrera, Jaime

Flores

National Director of Casa

Alianza, Director of

programs of Casa Alianza

Taped 1h05min

Table 2: List of respondents

95

Annex 6: Completed conceptual framework

Intervention

methods

Respondents that incorporate these practices + the methods they use

5. Community-

based

1.1 Local

community

/neighborhood

E. Bardales, U. Herrera (Casa Alianza), M. Obando (UNICEF), A.

Rodriguez (UNAH): reintegration process should take place in

one’s own community

M. Obando (UNICEF) in cooperation with PNPRRS: community

models

O. Lopez (UNAH), I. Pereyra, A. Rodriguez (UNAH), D. Urbina

(PNPRRS): rebuilding the relationship with the community

(convince the community to give a second chance); reconciliation

M. Obando (UNICEF), G. Ruelas (Casa Alianza): recuperation of

public spaces

Community police officer, M. Flores (Proyecto Victoria):

relocation in safer environment or isolation from one’s

community

Community police officer, U. Herrera (Casa Alianza), O. Lopez,

I. Pereyra, D. Urbina (PNPRRS): truce between gangs

1.2 Family

M. Flores (Proyecto Victoria), M. Obando (UNICEF), G. Ruelas

(Casa Alianza): regular contact with/cooperation of family during

rehabilitation process

M. Obando (UNICEF), G. Ruelas (Casa Alianza): going back to

one’s own family during reintegration process

M. Obando (UNICEF): ensuring support from the family towards

the youngster

Community police officer, C. Díaz (UNAH) about ‘Project

Emanuelito’, U. Herrera (Casa Alianza): providing the family

with (financial) support

M. Flores (Proyecto Victoria), U. Herrera (Casa Alianza), M.

Obando (UNICEF): family counseling to strengthen or rebuild the

96

family ties

M. Flores (Proyeto Victoria): family program containing training,

information, guidance, preparation, capacitating and prevention

1.3 Education

M. Obando (UNICEF), NGO working with youth: going to school

or receiving education during rehabilitation process

U. Herrera (Casa Alianza), O. Lopez (UNAH), M. Obando

(UNICEF), A. Rodriguez (UNAH): reinserting into the

educational system during the reintegration process

M. Obando (UNICEF): receiving informal or vocational education

M. Obando (UNICEF): performing tasks within the school as port

of the reintegration process

M. Obando (UNICEF), PNPRRS: ‘Open Schools’ (“Escuelas

Abiertas”)

M. Obando (UNICEF): alternative school programs (e.g. home

schooling)

M. Flores (Proyecto Victoria): not working in cooperation with

one’s school in order to safeguard the youngster from reprisals

1.4 Religion

and church

Community police officer, C. Díaz, M. Flores (Proyecto Victoria),

the Pastor, A. Rodriguez (UNAH), D. Urbina (PNPRRS):

incorporating religion in the rehabilitation process

Community police officer, M. Flores (Proyecto Victoria), U.

Herrera (Casa Alianza), M. Obando (UNICEF), the Pastor, S.

Stadthagen (AJH-USAID), D. Urbina (PNPRRS): going to church

as an alternative way of living, for a gang member’s life within a

gang and/or as a refuge

E. Bardales: dynamics of religious groups (e.g. organizing youth

activities)

M. Flores (Proyecto Victoria): using the Bible to guide an ex-gang

member towards a straight way of living

M. Obando (UNICEF): joint project with Bishop Romulo

Emiliani and NGO ‘United for Life’ (‘Unidos por la Vida’)

97

Community police officer, S. Stadthagen (AJH-USAID):

cooperation with Christians in order to get access to areas which

are controlled by gangs

The Pastor: working with imprisoned gang members (and other

delinquents)

6. Psychological

treatment

M. Obando (UNICEF): family counseling

M. Flores (Proyecto Victoria): psychological deprogramming

C. Díaz (UNAH), U. Herrera (Casa Alianza), I. Pereyra: general

psychological attention

7. Medical

treatment

U. Herrera (Casa Alianza): general medical attention

D. Urbina (PNPRRS) and M. Obando (UNICEF): ‘Borrón y Vida

Nueva’, joint tattoo removal Project

M. Flores (Proyecto Victoria), M. Obando (UNICEF): drug

detoxification and rehabilitation of drug addicts

S. Stadthagen (AJH-USAID): financial support to

FUNDASALVA

8. Vocational

training

6.1 Interpersonal

skills

6.2 Employment

E. Bardales, M. Flores (Proyecto Victoria), U. Herrera and G.

Ruelas (Casa Alianza), M. Obando (UNICEF): vocational

education/training

E. Bardales, M. Obando (UNICEF): teaching commercial skills

(how to administrate a business)

C. Díaz (UNAH), M. Obando (UNICEF), G. Ruelas (Casa

Alianza), S. Stadthagen (AJH-USAID): creating micro enterprises

Community police officer, U. Herrera (Casa Alianza), M. Obando

(UNICEF), J. Reyes and F. Hernández (AJH-USAID): guarantee

of a decent income

E. Bardales, Community police officer, M. Flores (Proyecto

Victoria), F. Hernández (AJH-USAID), U. Herrera and G. Ruelas

(Casa Alianza), O. Lopez (UNAH), M. Obando (UNICEF), the

Pastor, I. Pereyra, A. Rodriguez (UNAH), D. Urbina (PNPRRS):

getting a job as part of the reintegration process

98

7 Holistic

approach

Community police officer, C. Díaz (UNAH), U. Herrera (Casa

Alianza), M. Obando (UNICEF): working in a collective setting

with all the above mentioned actors

Table 3: Completed conceptual framework